Promoting scientific integrity through open science in health psychology: results of the Synergy Expert Meeting of the European health psychology society

Kwaśnicka, Dominika; Hoor, Gill A. ten; Dongen, Anne van; Gruszczyńska, Ewa; Hagger, Martin S.; Hamilton, Kyra; Hankonen, Nelli; Heino, Matti Toivo Juhani; Kotzur, Marie; Noone, Chris; Rothman, Alexander J.; Toomey, Elaine; Warner, Lisa M.; Kok, Gerjo; Peters, Gjalt - Jorn Ygram; Luszczynska, Aleksandra

doi:10.1080/17437199.2020.1844037

Cited by 17 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The high profile and widespread dissemination of the reproducibility ‘crisis’ and biases within science, and the increased scrutiny within scientific organizations, means that it is highly unlikely that these issues will be suppressed as before, and there is genuine momentum to instigate real change in research practices within multiple fields, including psychology. Recommendations promulgated by open science advocate groups and organizations are being embraced and implemented by the publishers and funders of scientific research, by researchers’ employers, and by researchers themselves, representing a self-correction of the research practices that lead to problems with reproducibility and the presence of bias (Aczel et al, 2020 ; Earp & Trafimow, 2015 ; Kwasnicka et al, 2020 ; McDiarmid et al, 2021 ; Pashler & Harris, 2012 ; Smaldino & McElreath, 2016 ).…”

Section: Improving Research Integrity: the Evolution Of Open Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, my colleagues and I have published articles and commentaries on the subject of open science (e.g. Hagger, 2019 ; Kwasnicka et al, 2020 ), and have been involved with events that discuss optimal practices in open science at society meetings and with organizations that advocate for open science. These activities are aimed at raising awareness of the advantages of open science, and encouraging others to make changes to improve the transparency of their research practices and, in doing so, make a contribution to improving the quality and integrity of psychology research.…”

Section: A Commitment To Open Science and The Open Science ‘Mindset’mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developing an open science ‘mindset’

Hagger

2021

Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Identification of widespread biases present in reported research findings in many scientific disciplines, including psychology, such as failures to replicate and the likely extensive application of questionable research practices, has raised serious concerns over the reliability and trustworthiness of scientific research. This has led to the development of, and advocacy for, ‘open science’ practices, including data, materials, analysis, and output sharing, pre-registration of study predictions and analysis plans, and increased access to published research findings. Implementation of such practices has been enthusiastic in some quarters, but literacy in, and adoption of, these practices has lagged behind among many researchers in the scientific community. Advances In the current article I propose that researchers adopt an open science ‘mindset’, a comprehensive approach to open science predicated on researchers’ operating under the basic assumption that, wherever possible, open science practices will be a central component of all steps of their research projects. The primary, defining feature of the mindset is a commitment to open science principles in all research projects from inception to dissemination. Other features of the mindset include the assumption that all components of research projects (e.g. pre-registered hypotheses, protocols, materials, analysis plans, data, and output) will be accessible broadly; pro-active selection of open fora to disseminate research components and findings; open and transparent dissemination of reports of the research findings in advance of, and after, formal publication; and active promotion of open science practices through education, modeling, and advocacy. Conclusion The open science mindset is a ‘farm to fork’ approach to open science aimed at promoting comprehensive quality in application of open science, and widening participation in open science practices so that they become the norm in research in health psychology and behavioral medicine going forward.

show abstract

Section: Improving Research Integrity: the Evolution Of Open Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Commitment To Open Science and The Open Science ‘Mindset’mentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing an open science ‘mindset’

Hagger

2021

Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[Begel and Siegmund 2019] is to serve as a forum for presenting and discussing planned studies [Mc-Chesney and Bond 2018] as a move towards the notion of study pre-registration -a practice which is becoming more widespread in some disciplines e.g. psychology [Kwasnicka et al 2020]. Also, the dissemination of existing data sets ] strengthens the capability of the eye movements in programming community in its efforts towards greater reproducibility or otherwise of results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye Tracking Analysis of Code Layout, Crowding and Dyslexia - An Open Data Set

McChesney

Bond

2021

ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within computer science there is increasing recognition of the need for research data sets to be openly available to facilitate transparency and reproducibility of studies. In this short paper an open data set is described which contains the eye tracking recordings from an experiment in which programmers with and without dyslexia reviewed and described Java code. The aim of the experiment was to investigate if crowding in code layout affected the gaze behaviour and program comprehension of programmers with dyslexia. The data set provides data from 30 participants (14 dyslexia, 16 control) and their eye gaze behaviour in reviewing three small Java programs in various combinations of crowded and spaced configurations. The key features of the data set are described and observations made on the effect of alternative area of interest configurations. The paper concludes with some observations on enhancing access to data sets through metadata, data provenance and visualizations. CCS CONCEPTS• Software and its engineering → Maintaining software; • Humancentered computing → Empirical studies in accessibility.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the act of removing information from datasets in an effort to anonymise participants' identities may remove important details and nuances from the participants' experiences that make the data limited or decontextualised, thus undermining the purposes of collecting qualitative data in the first place (Chauvette, Schick-Makaroff, and Molzahn 2019). While discussions of the merits and potential drawbacks of open science have increased within areas of research that are predominantly quantitative (e.g., Kwasnicka et al 2020;Walsh et al 2018), there has been limited discussion about open science practices in qualitative research approaches, and there are very few suggestions on whether and how to engage in open science for qualitative researchers in particular. In this paper, we aim to present a synthesis of key considerations for qualitative researchers engaging in open science practices, as well as some core values that underpin qualitative inquiry and inform the way that open science practices may be taken up and used within qualitative projects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations for making informed choices about engaging in open qualitative research

Tamminen

Bundon

Smith

et al. 2021

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is currently little guidance that exists for researchers in the sport and exercise sciences on open qualitative research practices. The purpose of paper is to provide researchers with guidance regarding the considerations necessary for making informed decisions about engaging in open research practices within qualitative inquiry. The guidance was developed through a series of four working group meetings with experts in qualitative research and meetings with key stakeholders (study participants, journal editors, and data management experts). The wider open qualitative research literature also informed the guidance. Nine core values were first identified as underpinning the considerations for engaging in open qualitative research practices: Choice (academic freedom and participant autonomy); Plurality not replication; Flexibility and emergent design; Transparency; Relational ethics; Quality; Education; Equity; and Responsibility. Considerations for researchers are then provided in the following areas as they pertain to open science practices in qualitative inquiry: Types of Data; Types of Studies; Participant Groups; Anonymity and Confidentiality; Participant Consent; Storage and Stewardship of Qualitative Data; Knowledge Dissemination and Open Access Publications; Cost, Time, and Resources; and Preregistration of Qualitative Studies. This paper provides an initial framework for identifying considerations for engaging in open qualitative research practices. These considerations will help qualitative researchers make informed decisions about and plan for implementation of open science practices, as well as assessing the risks and benefits of open science practices in qualitative inquiry.

show abstract

Promoting scientific integrity through open science in health psychology: results of the Synergy Expert Meeting of the European health psychology society

Cited by 17 publications

References 55 publications

Developing an open science ‘mindset’

Developing an open science ‘mindset’

Eye Tracking Analysis of Code Layout, Crowding and Dyslexia - An Open Data Set

Considerations for making informed choices about engaging in open qualitative research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About