scholarly journals Response to Flournoy (2021): Reflections on the benefits and challenges of communicating the results of a pre-registered study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica E Ellwood-Lowe ◽  
Ruthe Foushee ◽  
Mahesh Srinivasan
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Process ◽  
Journal Review ◽  
Final Version ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Thoughtful Comment ◽  
Dissemination Of Results

In 2020, we posted a preprint online presenting the results of two pre-registered studies, now published in revised form (Ellwood-Lowe et al., 2021; original preprint archived at https://osf.io/ktsdp/). While undergoing the journal review process, circulation of this preprint encouraged open feedback from peers, including a thoughtful comment on our studies and pre-registration best practices by Dr. John Flournoy (Flournoy, 2021). Here we respond to the points raised in Flournoy’s comments, and discuss the benefits and challenges of pre-registering “high-risk” studies, particularly as early career researchers. We begin by reflecting on our scientific process between the first pre-registration and the ultimate dissemination of results—pulling back a curtain to reveal a piece of the research process that is often occluded. Next, we address Flournoy’s comments directly and explain how they were helpful in shaping the final version of our paper. Finally, we make suggestions for pre-registered studies in the future.

scholarly journals Using participatory design and visual narrative inquiry to investigate researchers’ data challenges and recommendations for library research data services

2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 408-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor Mattern ◽  
Wei Jeng ◽  
Daqing He ◽  
Liz Lyon ◽  
Aaron Brenner
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Narrative Inquiry ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Visual Narrative ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Data Services ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Library Research

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report on an information gathering study on users’ research data-related challenges and proposals for library research data services (RDS). This study probes how early career researchers visually conceptualize the research process in their disciplines, their self-reported research data challenges, and their recommendations for library RDS. Design/methodology/approach – Two focus group sessions were undertaken with a total of eight early career researchers. Adopting the visual narrative inquiry method, the participants were asked to sketch the general research process in their domain. The individuals’ illustrations of the research process were then used as the basis for reflecting on their data-related needs and potential RDS that would assist them during the research process. Findings – Participants presented a research process that was more personal and, in most cases, more imperfect than the research lifecycle models that academic libraries are increasingly using for RDS development and communication. The authors present their data-related challenges, which included data access barriers, low knowledge of best practices for research data management, the need for a deeper understanding of post-publication impact, and inconsistent awareness of existing library and institution RDS. The authors outline RDS recommendations that participants proposed, which included a web-based tools, customized training sessions, and “distilled” guides to research data best practices. Practical implications – The study flagged users’ gaps in understandings of existing library and institutional RDS, suggesting that there may be an opportunity to engage users in the design of communications plans for services. The findings from this user study will inform the development of RDS at the institution. Originality/value – This paper puts forth a methodological approach that academic libraries can adapt for understanding users’ needs and user-generated design solutions.

25 Reflections on Accounting Research

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana R. Hermanson
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Journal Review ◽  
Accounting Research

ABSTRACT In this essay, I reflect on my roughly 25 years in accounting research by discussing 25 topics related to (1) the journal review process, (2) specific types of accounting research, and (3) the research process. I hope that these observations will prompt additional thought and discussion, help accounting doctoral students and faculty to publish their research, and potentially challenge some readers.

Agency in scientific discourse

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (62) (1) ◽  
pp. 71-86
Author(s):  
Tobias WEBER ◽  
Mia KLEE
Keyword(s):  
Critical Point ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Scientific Discourse ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Research Endeavour

In recent times, the trend of aiming for objectivity and reproducibility in science has arrived in linguistic discourse. A critical point in this debate is the agency in speakers’ language use and, simultaneously, in the researchers’ description and interpretation. The aim of objectivity demotes, by default, the role of the subjects, often by imposing structures to limit agency. We can see various scenarios where researchers can purposefully bend rules, thus exerting their agentive stance in the research endeavour. This paper aims to address issues pertaining to agency as opposed to the goal of reproducibility, where the researchers’ and consultants’ agency on different aspects of the research process shape its outcomes. Training early career researchers and students in using

scholarly journals Higher education research in African contexts: reflections from fieldwork in Flagship Universitiesin South Africa, Mozambique and Ethiopia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Addisalem Tebikew Yallew ◽  
Paul Othusitse Dipitso
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Education Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Eastern Africa ◽  
Higher Education Research ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Fieldwork Experience ◽  
Access To The Field

This article is written with the recognition that, as higher education studies evolve as a multidisciplinary area of inquiry, there is a need to reflect on the theoretical and practical concerns emerging from conducting higher education research. This is especially the case for early-career researchers who enter this relatively new field of study. This article attempts to explore the fieldwork component of the research process considering our experiences as early-career researchers conducting PhD studies in four universities in southern and eastern Africa. The article focuses on issues related to ethics, gaining and negotiating access to the field, and dealing with positionality during fieldwork. While reflecting on these experiences, we also attempted to explore if there are any fieldwork dynamics, which are peculiar to the African higher education context that may be considered during data collection. Reflecting on our experiences, we have argued that, in some institutions, necessary procedures for researching higher education need to be in place, while with the ones that have institutionalised mechanisms the procedures adopted need to be aligned with contextual realities and should focus on ethical considerations rather than protecting the reputation of universities. Our fieldwork experience has also made us realise that the advice given to early-career researchers both in the literature, seminars and courses they attend may not adequately prepare them for the unpredictable fieldwork dynamics. In that regard, we have suggested that there is a need to prepare emerging researchers to be open-minded, flexible, reflexive, innovative and adaptable when going out to the field.

scholarly journals Data Collection Challenges and Recommendations for Early Career Researchers

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marylen Rimando ◽  
Andrea Brace ◽  
Apophia Namageyo-Funa ◽  
Tiffany Parr ◽  
Diadrey-Anne Sealy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Research Mentoring ◽  
Data Collection Process ◽  
The Social

Data collection is critical to the social research process. When implemented correctly, data collection enhances the quality of a social research study. However, doctoral students and early career researchers may encounter challenges with data collection. This article reports on the data collection challenges in dissertation research encountered by doctoral students enrolled in a public health program at a southeastern United States urban university. Each doctoral student shared at least one challenge and how it affected the data collection process. Additionally, the doctoral students shared how the identified challenges were addressed or suggested recommendations. Understanding these experiences of doctoral students is helpful for doctoral students and early career researchers conducting social research. The lessons learned may guide faculty in research mentoring and structuring research seminars for doctoral students.

scholarly journals Perspectives for early-career researchers on plagiarism and scientific integrity

FACETS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-25
Author(s):  
Robert G. Young ◽  
T. Fatima Mitterboeck
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scientific Investigation ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Integrity ◽  
Predatory Journals ◽  
Early Career Researchers

Lapses in scientific integrity, such as plagiarism, persist in the scientific realm. To be successful and contributory, early-career researchers (ECRs), including graduate students, need to be able to effectively navigate the literature, peer-review process, and scientific research with integrity. Here we discuss different aspects of scientific integrity related to ECRs. Our discussion centres on the concepts of plagiarism and intellectual property, predatory journals, aspects of peer review, transparency in publishing, and false advanced accreditations. Negative elements within these topics may be especially damaging to ECRs, who may be less familiar with the research landscape. We highlight the need for ECRs to approach scientific investigation cautiously and thoughtfully to promote integrity through critical thinking.

scholarly journals Conceptualising quality in co-produced research

2020 ◽  
pp. 146879412091909
Author(s):  
Marilyn Howard ◽  
Helen Thomas-Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Policy Studies ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Process Outcomes ◽  
Key Dimensions

Co-produced research is said to create new knowledge through including the perspectives of those traditionally excluded from knowledge production, which in turn is expected to enhance research quality and impact. This article critically examines academic and UK voluntary sector literature concerning participatory and co-produced approaches to explore how quality is currently understood in co-produced research. Drawing on early career researchers’ experiences of a programme of co-produced research, the authors illustrate how theory and practice of co-production can differ, and the implications for conceptualising ‘research quality’ within co-produced research. Drawing on debates within qualitative research, community work and policy studies, the article outlines a potential framework for raising questions of ‘quality’, co-produced by research partners as part of the research process. Key dimensions of this framework are process, outcomes and autonomy.

scholarly journals I won’t be #BulliedIntoBadScience

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corina Logan
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Public ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Research Administrators ◽  
Central Resource ◽  
Peer Community ◽  
The Individual

Watch the VIDEO.The #BulliedIntoBadScience (BIBS) campaign consists of early career researchers leading individuals and institutions in adopting open practices to improve research rigor (from all fields, not only the sciences). I will share how BIBS started and discuss what we as researchers are doing to stop exploiting ourselves and the public when sharing our research with each other and the public. We are developing best practices for facilitating higher quality research and tackling biases in this rapidly changing world of scholarly publishing. I will share case studies at the individual level (e.g., how a PI can run an open and transparent lab), at the level of the academic community (e.g., changing editorial practices via efforts such as Editors4BetterResearch and Peer Community in Ecology), and at the level of institutions (e.g., serving as Data Champions and advising governments). We at BIBS aim to be a central resource for people to share and organize best practices, thus it is useful for researchers, librarians and research administrators.

scholarly journals How to publish your manuscript successfully (with Wiley)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matteo Cavalleri
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Training Module ◽  
Early Career Researchers

Part of the training module on publishing with the Council of Australian University Librarians, this 1h webinar provides tips to Early Career Researchers on how to write and accompany an article through the peer-review process. Not specific to Wiley journals, but why go elsewhere, really?

Mentoring gone wrong: What is happening to mentorship in academia?

2020 ◽  
pp. 147821032097219
Author(s):  
Francesco E Marino
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Current Model ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Recruitment And Retention ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
A Priority ◽  
Teaching Programs

Mentorship is one of the most important founding elements of academia. In fact, it can be easily argued that mentorship was born with academia. An effective mentorship in training and teaching programs results in the recruitment and retention of qualified students and early-career researchers. However, what are the current best practices of mentoring? And is mentorship currently a priority in academic and research institutions? The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief overview of the current model of mentorship in academia and highlight some of the key qualities of an academic mentor.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document