Journal of Trial and Error最新文献

Three Persistent Myths about Open Science 关于开放科学的三个顽固神话

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.36850/mr11

Moin Syed

引用次数: 0

Serendipity in Scientific Research 科学研究中的偶然性

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI: 10.36850/v91j-7541

Wendy Ross, Samantha Copeland, Stuart Feinstein

引用次数: 1

The Music Must Play On: The Music Therapy Sessions that Should not Have Stopped 音乐必须继续：不该停止的音乐治疗课程

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-12-22 DOI: 10.36850/mbmc-r441

Ayelet Dassa

引用次数: 0

Medical Expert Endorsement Fails to Reduce Vaccine Hesitancy in U.K. Residents 医学专家的认可未能减少英国居民对疫苗的犹豫

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-09-07 DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/gh5vy

Folco Panizza, P. Ronzani, Carlos Martini, Lucia Savadori, Matteo Motterlini

引用次数: 0

A Manifesto for Rewarding and Recognizing Team Infrastructure Roles 奖励和承认团队基础架构角色的宣言

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-08-14 DOI: 10.36850/mr8

Arielle Bennett, Daniel Garside, Cassandra Gould van Praag, T. Hostler, Ismael Kherroubi Garcia, E. Plomp, Antonio Schettino, S. Teplitzky, Hao Ye

{"title":"A Manifesto for Rewarding and Recognizing Team Infrastructure Roles","authors":"Arielle Bennett, Daniel Garside, Cassandra Gould van Praag, T. Hostler, Ismael Kherroubi Garcia, E. Plomp, Antonio Schettino, S. Teplitzky, Hao Ye","doi":"10.36850/mr8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36850/mr8","url":null,"abstract":"The Scientific Reform Movement has highlighted the need for large research teams with diverse skills. This has necessitated the growth of professional team infrastructure roles (TIRs) who support research through specialised skills, but do not have primary responsibility for conceiving or leading research projects. TIRs such as Lab Technicians, Project Managers, Data Stewards, Community Managers, and Research Software Engineers all play an important role in ensuring the success of a research project, but are commonly neglected under current reward and recognition procedures, which focus on the individual academic researcher instead of the teams involved.\u0000\u0000Without meaningful identification and recognition of TIR contributions, we risk reinforcing the conceptual and practical division between academic researchers and TIRs. This situation is inequitable and detrimental to the research enterprise: the limited potential for career advancement for TIRs may cause them to leave for other occupations, ultimately leading to a loss of institutional skill, expertise, and memory.\u0000\u0000This contribution explores the evolution of specialist TIRs and the status of these positions in various settings. We provide three case study descriptions of TIR activities, so that readers may become more familiar with the breadth and depth of their work. We then propose system level changes designed to embed meaningful recognition of all contributions. Acknowledging the contributions of all research roles will help retain skill and expertise, and lead to collaborative research ecosystems that are well-positioned to address complex research challenges.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126137662","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Rethinking Transparency and Rigor from a Qualitative Open Science Perspective 从定性开放科学的角度重新思考透明度和严谨性

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-05-17 DOI: 10.36850/mr7

Crystal N. Steltenpohl, Hilary Lustick, M. S. Meyer, L. E. Lee, Sondra M. Stegenga, Laurel Standiford Reyes, R. Renbarger

{"title":"Rethinking Transparency and Rigor from a Qualitative Open Science Perspective","authors":"Crystal N. Steltenpohl, Hilary Lustick, M. S. Meyer, L. E. Lee, Sondra M. Stegenga, Laurel Standiford Reyes, R. Renbarger","doi":"10.36850/mr7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36850/mr7","url":null,"abstract":"Discussions around transparency in open science focus primarily on sharing data, materials, and coding schemes, especially as these practices relate to reproducibility. This fairly quantitative perspective of transparency does not align with all scientific methodologies. Indeed, qualitative researchers also care deeply about how knowledge is produced, what factors influence the research process, and how to share this information. Explicating a researcher’s background and role allows researchers to consider their impact on the research process and interpretation of the data, thereby increasing both transparency and rigor. Researchers may engage in positionality and reflexivity in a variety of ways, and transparently sharing these steps allows readers to draw their own informed conclusions about the results and study as a whole. Imposing a limited, quantitatively-informed set of standards on all research can cause harm to researchers and the communities they work with if researchers are not careful in considering the impact of such standards. Our paper will argue the importance of avoiding strong defaults around transparency (e.g., always share data) and build upon previous work around qualitative open science. We explore how transparency in all aspects of our research can lend itself toward projecting and confirming the rigor of our work.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"2012 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127390544","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 5

Reflections on Preregistration: Core Criteria, Badges, Complementary Workflows 对预注册的反思:核心标准、徽章、补充工作流程

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-05-15 DOI: 10.36850/mr6

Robert T. Thibault, C. Pennington, M. Munafo

引用次数: 4

The Invisible Workload of Open Research 开放研究的无形工作量

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-05-04 DOI: 10.36850/mr5

T. Hostler

{"title":"The Invisible Workload of Open Research","authors":"T. Hostler","doi":"10.36850/mr5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36850/mr5","url":null,"abstract":"It is acknowledged that conducting open research requires additional time and effort compared to conducting ‘closed’ research. However, this additional work is often discussed only in abstract terms, a discourse which ignores the practicalities of how researchers are expected to find the time to engage with these practices in the context of their broader role as multifaceted academics. In the context of a sector that is blighted by stress, burnout, untenable workloads, and hyper-competitive pressures to produce, there is a clear danger that additional expectations to engage in open practices add to the workload burden and increase pressure on academics even further. In this article, the theories of academic capitalism and workload creep are used to explore how workload models currently exploit researchers by mismeasuring academic labour. The specific increase in workload resulting from open practices and associated administration is then outlined, including via the cumulative effects of administrative burden. It is argued that there is a high chance that without intervention, increased expectations to engage in open research practices may lead to unacceptable increases in demands on academics. Finally, the individual and systematic responsibilities to mitigate this are discussed.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130294316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Challenges of Using Signaling Data From Telecom Network in Non-Urban Areas 在非城市地区使用电信网络信令数据的挑战

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-05-03 DOI: 10.36850/e14

Håvard Toft, Alexey Sirotkin, Markus Landrø, R. Engeset, J. Hendrikx

{"title":"Challenges of Using Signaling Data From Telecom Network in Non-Urban Areas","authors":"Håvard Toft, Alexey Sirotkin, Markus Landrø, R. Engeset, J. Hendrikx","doi":"10.36850/e14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36850/e14","url":null,"abstract":"Outdoor recreation continues to increase in popularity. In Norway, several avalanche fatalities are recorded every year, but the accurate calculation of a fatal accident rate is impossible without knowing how many people are exposed. We attempted to employ signaling data from telecom network data to enumerate backcountry travelers in avalanche terrain. Each signaling data event contains information about which coverage area the phone is connected to and timestamp. There is no triangulation, making it impossible to know whether the associated phone is moving or stationary within the coverage area. Hence, it's easier to track the phone's movement through different coverage areas. We utilize this by enumerating the number of people with phones traveling to avalanche-prone terrain for the 2019/2020 winter season. We estimated that 13,666 phones were in avalanche terrain during the season, ranging from 0 to 118 phones/day with an average of 75 phones/day. We correlated the number of phones per day against amount of daylight (R2=0.186, p-value <0.01), weekends and holidays (R2=0.073, p-value <0.01), number of bulletin views (R2=0.045, p-value <0.01). Unfortunately, the validation revealed discrepancies between the estimated positions in the mobile network and the true reference positions as collected with a GPS. We attribute this to the algorithm being designed to measure urban mobility and the long distance between the base transceiver stations in mountainous areas. This lack of coherence between the signaling data and GPS records for rural areas in Norway has implication for the utility of signaling data outside of urban regions.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130124838","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Questionable Metascience Practices 可疑的元科学实践

Journal of Trial and Error Pub Date : 2023-04-24 DOI: 10.36850/mr4

Mark Rubin

{"title":"Questionable Metascience Practices","authors":"Mark Rubin","doi":"10.36850/mr4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36850/mr4","url":null,"abstract":"Questionable research practices may reduce the public’s trust in science. The present article considers some questionable metascience practices (QMPs) that may threaten scientists’ trust in metascience. A QMP is a research practice, assumption, or perspective that has been questioned by several commentators as being potentially problematic for the credibility of metascience and/or the science reform movement. The present article reviews 10 QMPs that relate to criticism, replication, bias, generalization, and the characterization of science. Specifically, the following QMPs are considered: (1) rejecting or ignoring self-criticism; (2) a fast ‘n’ bropen scientific criticism style; (3) overplaying the role of replication in science; (4) assuming a replication rate is “too low” without specifying an “acceptable” rate; (5) an unacknowledged metabias towards explaining the replication crisis in terms of researcher bias; (6) assuming that researcher bias can be reduced; (7) devaluing exploratory results as more “tentative” than confirmatory results; (8) presuming that QRPs are problematic research practices; (9) focusing on knowledge accumulation as an index of scientific progress; and (10) focusing on specific scientific methods. It is stressed that only some metascientists engage in some QMPs some of the time, and that these QMPs may not always be problematic. Research is required to estimate the prevalence and impact of QMPs. In the meantime, QMPs should be viewed as invitations to ask “questions” about how we go about doing metascience rather than as grounds for mistrusting the credibility of metascience.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122987699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1