A Roadmap for Transparent Research in Special Education and Related Disciplines

Adelson, Jill L.; Barton, Erin E.; Bradshaw, Catherine P.; Bryant, Brian R.; Bryant, Diane Pedrotty; Cook, Bryan G.; Coyne, Michael J.; DeBettencourt, Laurie; DeHaven, Alexander C.; Dymond, Stacy K.; Esposito, Jolene; Farmer, Thomas W.; Gage, Nicholas A.; Kennedy, Michael Peter; Kern, Lee; Lane, Kathleen Lynne; Lee, David; Lembke, Erica S.; Levine, Felice J.; Lloyd, John Wills; Maggin, Daniel M.; Maheady, Lawrence; Makel, Matthew C.; Mason, Linda; Matthews, Michael S.; Mazzotti, Valerie L.; Mellor, David Thomas; Nosek, Brian A.; Renshaw, Tyler L.; Anne, Rabia Anne Rabia; Shogren, Karrie A.; Soderberg, Courtney K.; Solari, Emily J.; Spooner, Fred; Symons, Frank J.; Talbott, Elizabeth; Test, Dave; Therrien, William J.; Thompson, James C.; Travers, Jason C.; Troia, Gary A.

doi:10.35542/osf.io/sqfy3

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We are basing these decision points on prior work detailing best practices for addressing missing data through multiple imputation. Similar to work on best practices in preregistration (van den Akker et al, 2021) and open science (Adelson et al, 2019), we hope this paper demystifies the process of understanding and applying multiple imputation. We provide a practical guide for authors, reviewers and editors, and include recommendations for the information that should be included in peer-reviewed manuscripts and their supplements.…”

Section: Name Acronym Definitionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Best practices for addressing missing data through multiple imputation

Woods

Gerasimova

Dusen

et al. 2023

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common challenge in developmental research is the amount of incomplete and missing data that occurs from respondents failing to complete tasks or questionnaires, as well as from disengaging from the study (i.e., attrition). This missingness can lead to biases in parameter estimates and, hence, in the interpretation of findings. These biases can be addressed through statistical techniques that adjust for missing data, such as multiple imputation. Although multiple imputation is highly effective, it has not been widely adopted by developmental scientists given barriers such as lack of training or misconceptions about imputationThe foundation for this paper was created during a 'hackathon' session occurring on 23 June 2021, at the annual virtual meeting of the Society for Improving Psychological Science. We invited anyone interested in the topic to attend, welcoming both experts and those with little experience addressing missing data in their research, specifically welcoming participation from those who were not sure how to address the missing data they experienced.Decisional guidelines for analyzing the type and extent of missing data were then crowdsourced and curated during this hackathon, resulting in a missing data and multiple imputation decision tree (Woods et al., 2021, available at https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mdw5r) and a companion infographic (Woods & Schmidt, 2021, available at https://miro.com/app/board/o9_J18JGJQk=/). We also created multiple imputation coding templates for several prominent software languages (Stata, Mplus, R, SPSS, SAS and Blimp). All hackathon materials and coding templates are available at https://osf.io/j3f8m/.

show abstract

Section: Name Acronym Definitionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Best practices for addressing missing data through multiple imputation

Woods

Gerasimova

Dusen

et al. 2023

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Limited access to peer-reviewed literature slows scientific progress (Adelson et al, 2019) and perpetuates the ongoing research-to-practice gap in special education and related fields (e.g., Cook et al, 2023). Simply stated, the special education community cannot base practice and policy on research without full access to publications reporting research findings, synthesizing research findings, and providing guidance on implementing research-based practices.…”

Section: The Problem Of Paywalls and The Promise Of Open-access Publi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Open-Access Publishing in Special Education and Related Fields: Making Scholarship Freely Available to All

Lindström,

Fleming,

Pfeiffer

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open access to research findings, syntheses of research, and papers providing guidance on implementing research-based practices is critical for informing policy and practice in special education and related fields. Yet most published articles are behind paywalls and cannot be accessed freely by many practitioners, policymakers, individuals with disabilities and their families, and other interested parties. In this article, we describe the benefits of open-access publishing for researchers and research consumers, as well as different types of open-access publishing--with a particular focus on self-archiving or green open-access publishing. Self-archiving makes papers freely available, with little time burden and no monetary cost to authors. We provide recommendations for what, where, when, and how to self archive one’s papers. We conclude by sharing our own experiences with open-access publishing.

show abstract

“…Each of these issues is potentially problematic for fields like special education that rely on trustworthy and credible research to inform policy and practice for students with disabilities. Because many researchers in the field are not facile with preregistration (Fleming et al, 2022), Adelson and colleagues (2019) recommended that special education stakeholders provide resources to support scholars in their efforts to learn about and engage in preregistration. Although resources and guides have been published for other open science practices in the field (Cook, Fleming, et al, 2022; Fleming & Cook, 2022; Fleming et al, 2021; Logan et al, 2021), to our knowledge, a review of preregistration registries has not been conducted specifically for special education researchers.…”

Section: Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Four Preregistration Registries for Special Education Researchers

Fleming

McLucas

Cook

2023

Remedial and Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preregistration involves researchers publicly registering key study elements before conducting a study to increase the transparency of research and limit the use and impact of questionable research practices. To support special education researchers’ engagement with preregistrations, in this article we provide an overview of preregistration and systematically review four preregistration registries (Open Science Framework, Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies, AsPredicted, and ClinicalTrials). Each of the registry templates reviewed effectively addresses most questionable research practices and can accommodate a variety of research designs, with the exception of mixed-methods research. Among the benefits of Registry of Efficacy and Effectiveness Studies, Open Science Framework, and ClinicalTrials are the provision of highly specific templates and allowing users to update the preregistration when changes to the original study occur. Researchers can use this review to help select and use a registry that is appropriate for their study design and purpose.

show abstract

A Roadmap for Transparent Research in Special Education and Related Disciplines

Cited by 7 publications

References 13 publications

Best practices for addressing missing data through multiple imputation

Best practices for addressing missing data through multiple imputation

Open-Access Publishing in Special Education and Related Fields: Making Scholarship Freely Available to All

Review of Four Preregistration Registries for Special Education Researchers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About