Updating search results...

Search Resources

4 Results

View
Selected filters:
Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency
Unrestricted Use
CC BY
Rating
0.0 stars

Beginning January 2014, Psychological Science gave authors the opportunity to signal open data and materials if they qualified for badges that accompanied published articles. Before badges, less than 3% of Psychological Science articles reported open data. After badges, 23% reported open data, with an accelerating trend; 39% reported open data in the first half of 2015, an increase of more than an order of magnitude from baseline. There was no change over time in the low rates of data sharing among comparison journals. Moreover, reporting openness does not guarantee openness. When badges were earned, reportedly available data were more likely to be actually available, correct, usable, and complete than when badges were not earned. Open materials also increased to a weaker degree, and there was more variability among comparison journals. Badges are simple, effective signals to promote open practices and improve preservation of data and materials by using independent repositories.

Subject:
Biology
Life Science
Psychology
Social Science
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
PLOS Biology
Author:
Agnieszka Slowik
Brian A. Nosek
Carina Sonnleitner
Chelsey Hess-Holden
Curtis Kennett
Erica Baranski
Lina-Sophia Falkenberg
Ljiljana B. Lazarević
Mallory C. Kidwell
Sarah Piechowski
Susann Fiedler
Timothy M. Errington
Tom E. Hardwicke
Date Added:
08/07/2020
Evaluating Registered Reports: A Naturalistic Comparative Study of Article Impact
Unrestricted Use
CC BY
Rating
0.0 stars

Registered Reports (RRs) is a publishing model in which initial peer review is conducted prior to knowing the outcomes of the research. In-principle acceptance of papers at this review stage combats publication bias, and provides a clear distinction between confirmatory and exploratory research. Some editors raise a practical concern about adopting RRs. By reducing publication bias, RRs may produce more negative or mixed results and, if such results are not valued by the research community, receive less citations as a consequence. If so, by adopting RRs, a journal’s impact factor may decline. Despite known flaws with impact factor, it is still used as a heuristic for judging journal prestige and quality. Whatever the merits of considering impact factor as a decision-rule for adopting RRs, it is worthwhile to know whether RRs are cited less than other articles. We will conduct a naturalistic comparison of citation and altmetric impact between published RRs and comparable empirical articles from the same journals.

Subject:
Life Science
Social Science
Material Type:
Reading
Author:
Brian A. Nosek
Felix Singleton Thorn
Lilian T. Hummer
Timothy M. Errington
Date Added:
08/07/2020
What is replication?
Read the Fine Print
Rating
0.0 stars

Replications are inevitably different from the original studies. How do we decide whether something is a replication? The answer shifts the conception of replication from a boring, uncreative, housekeeping activity to an exciting, generative, vital contributor to research progress.

Subject:
Applied Science
Life Science
Physical Science
Social Science
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
Center for Open Science
Author:
Brian A. Nosek
Timothy M. Errington
Date Added:
09/10/2019
An open investigation of the reproducibility of cancer biology research
Unrestricted Use
CC BY
Rating
0.0 stars

It is widely believed that research that builds upon previously published findings has reproduced the original work. However, it is rare for researchers to perform or publish direct replications of existing results. The Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology is an open investigation of reproducibility in preclinical cancer biology research. We have identified 50 high impact cancer biology articles published in the period 2010-2012, and plan to replicate a subset of experimental results from each article. A Registered Report detailing the proposed experimental designs and protocols for each subset of experiments will be peer reviewed and published prior to data collection. The results of these experiments will then be published in a Replication Study. The resulting open methodology and dataset will provide evidence about the reproducibility of high-impact results, and an opportunity to identify predictors of reproducibility.

Subject:
Applied Science
Biology
Health, Medicine and Nursing
Life Science
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
eLife
Author:
Brian A Nosek
Elizabeth Iorns
Fraser Elisabeth Tan
Joelle Lomax
Timothy M Errington
William Gunn
Date Added:
08/07/2020