Open Minds, Open Methods: Transparency and Inclusion in Pursuit of Better Scholarship

Rinke, Eike Mark; Wuttke, Alexander

doi:10.1017/s1049096520001729

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the issue of research transparency has become so important that PS: Political Science & Politics published seven papers in a collection titled “Opening Political Science.” These papers all advance important arguments about how political science can improve research transparency (Breznau 2021; Engzell and Rohrer 2020; Janz and Freese 2020; Kapiszewski and Karcher 2020; Lupia 2020; Rinke and Wuttke 2021; Rohlfing et al 2020). However, missing from this collection of papers is practical advice for scholars who are submitting their work to journals that have research-transparency requirements for publication.…”

mentioning

confidence: 68%

How (Not) to Reproduce: Practical Considerations to Improve Research Transparency in Political Science

Alvarez

Heuberger

2021

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, scholars, journals, and professional organizations in political science have been working to improve research transparency. Although better transparency is a laudable goal, the implementation of standards for reproducibility still leaves much to be desired. This article identifies two practices that political science should adopt to improve research transparency: (1) journals must provide detailed replication guidance and run provided material; and (2) authors must begin their work with replication in mind. We focus on problems that occur when scholars provide research materials to journals for replication, and we outline best practices regarding documentation and code structure for researchers to use.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 68%

How (Not) to Reproduce: Practical Considerations to Improve Research Transparency in Political Science

Alvarez

Heuberger

2021

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bropen science demonstrates how open science spaces are typically governed by white, male, Western values and voices (e.g., see Murphy et al, 2020). As Derksen (2019) highlights, this hyper-patriarchal discourse largely disadvantages minority groups and inhibits participation (see also Rinke & Wuttke, 2020). As Whitaker and Guest (2020) explain, not all "bros" within #bropenscience are men; instead, bros are academics who operate with rigid thinking, a lack of self-awareness, and a tendency for hostility, unkindness, and exclusion.…”

Section: Barriers To Participation In Open Science As a Feminist Ecrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These issues are particularly prevalent in marginalized groups, such as women (Levecque et al, 2017). However, open science should also work to expand the inclusivity and diversity of people who represent the movement, unraveling the #bropenscience discourse that has previously left feminist ECRs feeling unable, or undeserving, of participation (e.g., Rinke & Wuttke, 2020).…”

Section: Barriers To Participation In Open Science As a Feminist Ecrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

Pownall

Talbot

Henschel

et al. 2021

Psychology of Women Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open science aims to improve the rigor, robustness, and reproducibility of psychological research. Despite resistance from some academics, the open science movement has been championed by some early career researchers (ECRs), who have proposed innovative new tools and methods to promote and employ open research principles. Feminist ECRs have much to contribute to this emerging way of doing research. However, they face unique barriers, which may prohibit their full engagement with the open science movement. We, 10 feminist ECRs in psychology from a diverse range of academic and personal backgrounds, explore open science through a feminist lens to consider how voice and power may be negotiated in unique ways for ECRs. Taking a critical and intersectional approach, we discuss how feminist early career research may be complemented or challenged by shifts towards open science. We also propose how ECRs can act as grass-roots changemakers within the context of academic precarity. We identify ways in which open science can benefit from feminist epistemology and end with envisaging a future for feminist ECRs who wish to engage with open science practices in their own research.

show abstract

“…Active deliberation of this trend is overdue: scholars concerned about leaked documents should contest their usage rather than just silently refraining from citing them. Third, the concrete problem of WikiLeaks in security studies should engage political science conversations on transparency and replication (Jacobs et al 2021;Rinke and Wuttke 2021), and research ethics particularly regarding human subjects (APSA 2020; Boustead and Herr 2020; Kapiszewski and Wood 2021;Subotić 2021). How to handle primary-source evidence is increasingly recognized as a widespread and pressing concern.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Provenance Problem: Research Methods and Ethics in the Age of WikiLeaks

Darnton

2021

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How should political scientists navigate the ethical and methodological quandaries associated with analyzing leaked classified documents and other nonconsensually acquired sources? Massive unauthorized disclosures may excite qualitative scholars with policy revelations and quantitative researchers with big-data suitability, but they are fraught with dilemmas that the discipline has yet to resolve. This paper critiques underspecified research designs and opaque references in the proliferation of scholarship with leaked materials, as well as incomplete and inconsistent guidance from leading journals. It identifies provenance as the primary concept for improved standards and reviews other disciplines’ approaches to this problem. It elaborates eight normative and evidentiary criteria for scholars by which to assess source legitimacy and four recommendations for balancing their trade-offs. Fundamentally, it contends that scholars need deeper reflection on source provenance and its consequences, more humility about whether to access new materials and what inferences to draw, and more transparency in citation and research strategies.

show abstract

Open Minds, Open Methods: Transparency and Inclusion in Pursuit of Better Scholarship

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

How (Not) to Reproduce: Practical Considerations to Improve Research Transparency in Political Science

How (Not) to Reproduce: Practical Considerations to Improve Research Transparency in Political Science

Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

The Provenance Problem: Research Methods and Ethics in the Age of WikiLeaks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About