scholarly journals Open Science Practices in Gambling Research Publications (2016 – 2019): A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric R. Louderback ◽  
Sally M Gainsbury ◽  
Robert Heirene ◽  
Karen Amichia ◽  
Alessandra Grossman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Replication Studies

The replication crisis has stimulated researchers around the world to adopt open science research practices intended to reduce publication bias and improve research quality. Open science practices include study pre-registration, open data, open publication, and avoiding methods that can lead to publication bias and low replication rates. Although gambling studies uses similar research methods to behavioral research fields that have struggled with replication, we know little about the uptake of open science research practices in gambling-focused research. We conducted a scoping review of 500 recent (1/1/2016 – 12/1/2019) studies focused on gambling and problem gambling to examine the use of open science and transparent research practices. Our results showed that a small percentage of studies used most practices: whereas 54.6% (95% CI: [50.2, 58.9]) of studies used at least one of nine open science practices, each practice’s prevalence was: 1.6% for pre-registration (95% CI:[0.8, 3.1]), 3.2% for open data (95% CI:[2.0, 5.1]), 0% for open notebook, 35.2% for open access (95% CI:[31.1, 39.5]), 7.8% for open materials (95% CI:[5.8, 10.5]), 1.4% for open code (95% CI:[0.7, 2.9]), and 15.0% for preprint posting (95% CI:[12.1, 18.4]). In all, 6.4% (95% CI:[4.6, 8.9]) used a power analysis and 2.4% (95% CI:[1.4, 4.2]) of the studies were replication studies. Exploratory analyses showed that studies that used any open science practice, and open access in particular, had higher citation counts. We suggest several practical ways to enhance the uptake of open science principles and practices both within gambling studies and in science more broadly.

scholarly journals Open Developmental Science: An Overview and Annotated Reading List

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Kalandadze ◽  
Sara Ann Hart
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
The Core ◽  
Reading List ◽  
Annotated List ◽  
Developmental Science ◽  
Starting Point

The increasing adoption of open science practices in the last decade has been changing the scientific landscape across fields. However, developmental science has been relatively slow in adopting open science practices. To address this issue, we followed the format of Crüwell et al., (2019) and created summaries and an annotated list of informative and actionable resources discussing ten topics in developmental science: Open science; Reproducibility and replication; Open data, materials and code; Open access; Preregistration; Registered reports; Replication; Incentives; Collaborative developmental science.This article offers researchers and students in developmental science a starting point for understanding how open science intersects with developmental science. After getting familiarized with this article, the developmental scientist should understand the core tenets of open and reproducible developmental science, and feel motivated to start applying open science practices in their workflow.

scholarly journals How open science helps researchers succeed

eLife ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin C McKiernan ◽  
Philip E Bourne ◽  
C Titus Brown ◽  
Stuart Buck ◽  
Amye Kenall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Review Literature ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Media Attention ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Job Opportunities ◽  
Funding Opportunities

Open access, open data, open source and other open scholarship practices are growing in popularity and necessity. However, widespread adoption of these practices has not yet been achieved. One reason is that researchers are uncertain about how sharing their work will affect their careers. We review literature demonstrating that open research is associated with increases in citations, media attention, potential collaborators, job opportunities and funding opportunities. These findings are evidence that open research practices bring significant benefits to researchers relative to more traditional closed practices.

scholarly journals Born-Open Data for E-Prime

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis Cousineau
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Data Repository ◽  
Data Frame ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Data Practices ◽  
Data Files ◽  
Access Data

Born-Open Data experiments are encouraged for better open science practices. To be adopted, Born-Open data practices must be easy to implement. Herein, I introduce a package for E-Prime such that the data files are automatically saved on a GitHub repository. The BornOpenData package for E-Prime works seamlessly and performs the upload as soon as the experiment is finished so that there is no additional steps to perform beyond placing a package call within E-Prime. Because E-Prime files are not standard tab-separated files, I also provide an R function that retrieves the data directly from GitHub into a data frame ready to be analyzed. At this time, there are no standards as to what should constitute an adequate open-access data repository so I propose a few suggestions that any future Born-Open data system could follow for easier use by the research community.

scholarly journals Teaching Good Research Practices: Protocol of a Research Master Course

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-59
Author(s):  
Alexandra Sarafoglou ◽  
Suzanne Hoogeveen ◽  
Dora Matzke ◽  
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Keyword(s):  
Open Science ◽  
Recent Book ◽  
Practical Training ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Replication Studies ◽  
Public Sharing ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
Good Research

The current crisis of confidence in psychological science has spurred on field-wide reforms to enhance transparency, reproducibility, and replicability. To solidify these reforms within the scientific community, student courses on open science practices are essential. Here we describe the content of our Research Master course “Good Research Practices” which we have designed and taught at the University of Amsterdam. Supported by Chambers’ recent book The 7 Deadly Sins of Psychology, the course covered topics such as QRPs, the importance of direct and conceptual replication studies, preregistration, and the public sharing of data, code, and analysis plans. We adopted a pedagogical approach that: (a) reduced teacher-centered lectures to a minimum; (b) emphasized practical training on open science practices; and (c) encouraged students to engage in the ongoing discussions in the open science community on social media platforms.

Support for Open Science Practices in Emotion Science: A Survey Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olmo Van den Akker ◽  
Laura Danielle Scherer ◽  
Jelte M. Wicherts ◽  
Sander Koole
Keyword(s):  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Replication Studies ◽  
Positive Attitudes ◽  
Methodological Rigor ◽  
Negative Findings ◽  
Larger Sample

So-called “open science practices” seek to improve research transparency and methodological rigor. What do emotion researchers think about these practices? To address this question, we surveyed active emotion researchers (N= 144) in October 2019 about their attitudes toward several open science practices. Overall, the majority of emotion researchers had positive attitudes toward open science practices and expressed a willingness to engage in such practices. Emotion researchers on average believed that replicability would improve by publishing more negative findings, by requiring open data and materials, and by conducting studies with larger sample sizes. Direct replications, multi-lab studies, and preregistration were all seen as beneficial to the replicability of emotion research. Emotion researchers believed that more direct replications would be conducted if replication studies would receive increased funding, more citations, and easier publication in high impact journals. Emotion researchers believed that preregistration would be stimulated by providing researchers with more information about its benefits and more guidance on its effective application. Overall, these findings point to considerable momentum with regard to open science among emotion researchers. This momentum may be leveraged to achieve a more robust emotion science.

scholarly journals We Need the Open Artefact: Design Science as a Pathway to Open Science in Information Systems Research

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathal Doyle ◽  
Markus Luczak-Roesch ◽  
A Mittal
Keyword(s):  
Process Model ◽  
Design Science ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Information Systems Research ◽  
Competitive Funding

© 2019, Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Design science research (DSR) is facing some significant challenges such as how to make the knowledge and artefacts we create more accessible; exclusion from competitive funding schemes that require open practices; and a potential reproducibility crisis if scholars do not have access to everything needed to repeat past research. To help tackle these challenges we suggest that the community should strongly engage with open science, which has been growing in prominence in other fields in recent years. A review of current DSR literature suggests that researchers have not yet discussed how open science practices can be adopted within the field. Thus, we propose how the concepts of open science, namely open access, open data, open source, and open peer review, can be mapped to a DSR process model. Further, we identify an emerging concept, the open artefact, which provides an opportunity to make artefacts more accessible to practice and scholars. The aim of this paper is to stimulate a discussion amongst researchers about these open science practices in DSR, and whether it is a necessary step forward to keep the pace of the changing academic environment.

scholarly journals Assessing Open Science practices in physical activity behaviour change intervention evaluations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Norris ◽  
Isra Sulevani ◽  
Ailbhe N. Finnerty ◽  
Oscar Castro
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Physical Activity Behaviour ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Behaviour Change Intervention ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Activity Behaviour

Objectives: Concerns on the lack of reproducibility and transparency in science have led to a range of research practice reforms, broadly referred to as Open Science. The extent that physical activity interventions are embedding Open Science practices is currently unknown. In this study, we randomly sampled 100 reports of recent physical activity behaviour change interventions to estimate the prevalence of Open Science practices. Methods: One hundred reports of randomised controlled trial physical activity behaviour change interventions published between 2018-2021 were identified. Open Science practices were coded in identified reports, including: study pre-registration, protocol sharing, data-, materials- and analysis scripts-sharing, replication of a previous study, open access publication, funding sources and conflict of interest statements. Coding was performed by two independent researchers, with inter-rater reliability calculated using Krippendorffs alpha. Results: 78% of the 100 reports provided details of study pre-registration and 41% provided evidence of a published protocol. 4% provided accessible open data, 8% provided open materials and 1% provided open analysis scripts. 73% of reports were published as open access and no studies were described as replication attempts. 93% of reports declared their sources of funding and 88% provided conflicts of interest statements. A Krippendorffs alpha of 0.73 was obtained across all coding. Conclusion: Open data, materials, analysis and replication attempts are currently rare in physical activity behaviour change intervention reports, whereas funding source and conflict of interest declarations are common. Future physical activity research should increase the reproducibility of their methods and results by incorporating more Open Science practices.

scholarly journals Open Science in Kenya: Where are we?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kennedy Mwangi ◽  
Ben Mainye ◽  
Daniel Ouso ◽  
Esoh Kevin ◽  
Angela Muraya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The State ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Access Cost ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
And Training

According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Open Science is the movement to make scientific research and data accessible to all. It has great potential for advancing science. At its core, it includes (but is not limited to) open access, open data, and open research. Some of the associated advantages are promoting collaboration, sharing, and reproducibility in research, and preventing the reinvention of the wheel, thus saving resources. As research becomes more globalized and its output grows exponentially, especially in data, the need for open scientific research practices is more evident — the future of modern science. This has resulted in a concerted global interest in open science uptake. Even so, barriers still exist. The formal training curriculum in most, if not all, universities in Kenya does not equip students with the knowledge and tools to subsequently practice open science in their research. Therefore, to work openly and collaboratively, there is a need for awareness and training in the use of open science tools. These have been neglected, especially in most developing countries, and remain barriers to the cause. Moreover, there is scanty research on the state of affairs regarding the practice and/or adoption of open science. Thus, we developed, through the OpenScienceKE framework, a model to narrow the gap. A sensitize-train-hack-collaborate model was applied in Nairobi, the economic and administrative capital of Kenya. Using the model, we sensitized through seminars, trained on the use of tools through workshops, applied the skills learned in training through hackathons to collaboratively answer the question on the state of open science in Kenya. While the former parts of the model had 20 - 50 participants, the latter part mainly involved participants with a bioinformatics background, leveraging their advanced computational skills. This model resulted in an open resource that researchers can use to publish as open access cost-effectively. Moreover, we observed a growing interest in open science practices in Kenya through literature search and data mining, and that lack of awareness and skills may still hinder the adoption and practice of open science. Furthermore, at the time of the analyses, we surprisingly found that out of the 20,069 papers downloaded from BioRXiv, only 18 had Kenyan authors, a majority of which are international (16) collaborations. This may suggest poor uptake of the use of preprints among Kenyan researchers. The findings in this study highlight the state of open science in Kenya and the challenges facing its adoption and practice while bringing forth possible areas for primary consideration in the campaign towards open science. It also proposes a model (sensitize-train-hack-collaborate model) that may be adopted by researchers, funders, and other proponents of open science to address some of the challenges faced in promoting its adoption in Kenya.

scholarly journals We need the open artefact: Design Science as a pathway to Open Science in Information Systems research

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathal Doyle ◽  
Markus Luczak-Roesch ◽  
Abhinav Mittal
Keyword(s):  
Process Model ◽  
Design Science ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Information Systems Research ◽  
Competitive Funding

Design science research is facing some significant challenges such as how to make the knowledge and artefacts we create more accessible; exclusion from competitive funding schemes that require open practices; and a potential reproducibility crisis if scholars do not have access to everything needed to repeat past research. To help tackle these challenges we suggest that the community should strongly engage with open science, which has been growing in prominence in other fields in recent years. A review of current DSR literature suggests that re-searchers have not yet discussed how open science practices can be adopted with-in the field. Thus, we propose how the concepts of open science, namely open access, open data, open source, and open peer review, can be mapped to a DSR process model. Further, we identify an emerging concept, the open artefact, which provides an opportunity to make artefacts more accessible to practice and scholars. The aim of this paper is to stimulate a discussion amongst researchers about these open science practices in DSR, and whether it is a necessary step forward to keep the pace of the changing academic environment. ....................................................................................................................................................................This paper is a preprint of a paper accepted at DESRIST 2019 (https://desrist2019.org/).

scholarly journals Moving towards an Open Archaeology: projects, opportunities and challenges

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 538-554
Author(s):  
Edeltraud Aspöck
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Archaeological Practice ◽  
Selection Of

Generally, open science practices are only slowly having an impact on mainstream archaeological practice. An exception is the open access to publications, which, together with open data and open methodologies may represent those practices most relevant for archaeological researchers. This article introduces a selection of archaeology projects that embrace and facilitate open science practices. Finally there will be a discussion of some of the questions and challenges the discipline is facing in its move towards an Open Archaeology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document