Alternative Research Metrics

Towards discovering more effective means to promote code sharing as an open science practice, this study explores the current state of code sharing within the field of psychological methods and statistics and examines the association between this practice and conventional and alternative research metrics. Towards this purpose, a total of 815 articles from three major journals within the field of psychological methods and statistics were manually screened and encoded based on code sharing practices and general article characteristics. In addition, data on conventional (citation counts) and alternative research metrics (Altmetric Attention Score) was retrieved through online scientific databases (Web of Science and Altmetric.com). This input was then analysed using descriptive statistics and regression models suitable for count data, and robustness of the findings were assessed using multiverse analysis. The findings of this study suggest that the sharing of scientific computer code is not (yet) extensively practiced within the field of psychological methods and statistics. In the majority of academic articles included in this study, scientific computer code was not shared (66 %). Moreover, if such code was shared, it was frequently found to be improperly annotated (70 %) and/or incomplete (52 %). Nevertheless, the findings of this study also suggest a hopeful prospect, as the sharing of scientific computer code has increased between 2010 and 2017. The study revealed a robust positive connection with alternative research metrics. This study did not find robust positive connection between code sharing and citation counts.

Download Full-text

Q&A: Blazing trails through the Wild West of research metrics

Nature ◽

10.1038/d41586-018-02398-z ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Richard Van Noorden

Keyword(s):

Wild West ◽

Research Metrics

Download Full-text

How Digital Inclusion Increase Opportunities for Young People: Case of NEETs from Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su13147894 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (14) ◽

pp. 7894

Author(s):

Gabriela Neagu ◽

Muhammet Berigel ◽

Vladislava Lendzhova

Keyword(s):

Data Analysis ◽

Rural Areas ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Point Of View ◽

Multidimensional Analysis ◽

Theoretical Point ◽

Digital Inclusion ◽

Virtual Mobility ◽

Alternative Research ◽

High Share

This paper examines the perspectives of rural NEETs in the information society. Our analysis focuses on the situation of three European countries—Bulgaria, Romania, and Turkey—characterized by a high share of rural areas and a population of NEETs. From a methodological point of view, we use alternative research methods (secondary data analysis) with statistical methods (simple linear regression). From a theoretical point of view, we will opt for a multidimensional analysis perspective: the theory of digital divide, digital inclusion, virtual mobility, etc. Through data analysis, we expect to obtain a more complete and detailed picture of the ICT situation in rural areas (level of digital skills, level of digital inclusion) to demonstrate the importance of ICT in optimizing virtual mobility for the living conditions of the population, especially the NEET population.

Download Full-text

Moving Forward, One Step at a Time

International Organization ◽

10.1017/s0020818303572071 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 57 (2) ◽

pp. 431-444 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Barbara Koremenos ◽

Duncan Snidal

Keyword(s):

Research Design ◽

Rational Design ◽

Institutional Design ◽

Theoretical Perspective ◽

Design Decisions ◽

Design Project ◽

One Step ◽

Game Theoretic ◽

Alternative Research ◽

Future Work

We reply to John Duffield's critique of the Rational Design project, a special issue of International Organization that explains the features of international institutions from a game-theoretic perspective. The project was deliberately limited to the analysis of explicit and observable institutional arrangements, and focused on the specific institutional properties of centralization, membership, scope, control, and flexibility. Its empirical contribution relies on case studies, but it is significantly amplified by the tight connections provided by a common theoretical perspective that is oriented toward testing a set of specific conjectures about institutional design. The results raise further issues of measurement and cross-case comparisons that provide valuable lessons for future work on institutional design. Although all of these research design choices are worth revisiting and questioning, as Duffield does, the initial results of the Rational Design project show that it provides a good basis from which to explore alternative research design decisions.

Download Full-text