2020
DOI: 10.7554/elife.52157
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Open exploration

Abstract: Arguments in support of open science tend to focus on confirmatory research practices. Here we argue that exploratory research should also be encouraged within the framework of open science. We lay out the benefits of 'open exploration' and propose two complementary ways to implement this with little infrastructural change.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
21
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
4
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The goal here was rather to look for underlying patterns in the data that could then generate hypotheses for future research. In line with recommendations for exploratory research, we report the outcome of our multiple comparison correction procedure but also present the observed effect sizes (z scores) as well as the uncorrected p values, with a strong caution that these findings must be confirmed in future studies (Althouse, 2016;Feise, 2002;Rothman, 1990;Streiner, 2015;Thompson, Wright, & Bissett, 2020). Several differences were observed between formats in regards to within-and/or betweencommunity allegiance based on an uncorrected threshold of p < 0.05 (two-tailed) (Figure 3E and F).…”
Section: Differences In the Degree Of Within-and Between-community Allegiance Between Formatssupporting
confidence: 57%
“…The goal here was rather to look for underlying patterns in the data that could then generate hypotheses for future research. In line with recommendations for exploratory research, we report the outcome of our multiple comparison correction procedure but also present the observed effect sizes (z scores) as well as the uncorrected p values, with a strong caution that these findings must be confirmed in future studies (Althouse, 2016;Feise, 2002;Rothman, 1990;Streiner, 2015;Thompson, Wright, & Bissett, 2020). Several differences were observed between formats in regards to within-and/or betweencommunity allegiance based on an uncorrected threshold of p < 0.05 (two-tailed) (Figure 3E and F).…”
Section: Differences In the Degree Of Within-and Between-community Allegiance Between Formatssupporting
confidence: 57%
“…Due to the exploratory nature of the analyses, the background, methods, and analytic plan were preregistered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/xh7bz). However, we elected not to preregister specific hypotheses related to brain‐behavior associations because the intended purpose of the study was to use exploratory analyses to provide a holistic overview of how researcher degrees of freedoms impact interpretation of MID task results (Thompson et al., 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we also encourage creating more public repositories. These may contain many hardly filtered results, for instance, associations from "large scale studies" between many factors and outcomes (Pennycook, 2018;Thompson et al, 2020). Such repositories allow others to test their theories, wherefore it is advisable to provide many results (Greenland et al, 2004).…”
Section: Individual Versus Community-driven Filteringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3. Create new journal sections for explorative papers to emphasize the value of the complementary explorative track and reserve space to this end (McIntosh, 2017; Thompson et al, 2020).…”
Section: Recommendations To Stakeholdersmentioning
confidence: 99%