how hard can it be?
This week we are going to look at recent attempts to assess the the “reproducibility” of psychological science. There are 5 papers on our reading list this week. You will be assigned to read 1 of them and to write a summary and reaction. Bring your S&R to workshop to share with the group who were assigned the same paper as you.
In class, you will discuss the paper you have read in groups and then report back to the class.
Vanpaemel, W et al (2015) Are We Wasting a Good Crisis? The Availability of Psychological Research Data after the Storm. Collabra, 1(1): 3, pp. 1–5, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/collabra.13
Hardwicke, T. E., Mathur, M. B., MacDonald, K., Nilsonne, G., Banks, G. C., Kidwell, M. C., … & Frank, M. C. (2018). Data availability, reusability, and analytic reproducibility: Evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal Cognition. Royal Society open science, 5(8), 180448.
Obels, P., Lakens, D., Coles, N. A., Gottfried, J., & Green, S. A. (2020). Analysis of open data and computational reproducibility in registered reports in psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(2), 229-237.
Stodden, V., Seiler, J., & Ma, Z. (2018). An empirical analysis of journal policy effectiveness for computational reproducibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(11), 2584-2589.
Hardwicke, T. E., Bohn, M., MacDonald, K., Hembacher, E., Nuijten, M. B., Peloquin, B., … & Frank, M. C. (2020). Analytic reproducibility in articles receiving open data badges at Psychological Science: an observational study.