Science Fails. Let's Publish

Devine, Sean; Bautista-Perpinya, Max; Delrue, Valentine; Gaillard, Stefan; Jorna, Thomas F. K.; Meer, M. van der; Millett, Lottricia; Pozzebon, Chelsea; Visser, Jetze

doi:10.36850/ed1

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This mentality has seeped through to neoliberal academia: increased competitiveness, publication pressures, individualism, precarity and emphasis on “research excellence” ultimately make for worse science and stressed-out researchers (Loher and Strasser, 2019; Donskis et al. , 2019; Horton, 2020; Devine et al. , 2020, p. 2).…”

Section: Failure Ethnography and Research In Neoliberal Academiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although alternative ways of evaluating scholarly research are being explored and put into practice (see, for example, https://sfdora.org/), institutionalized metrics-based assessments still prevail, causing researchers to suffer from “performance anxieties” and dread the prospect of failing (Horton, 2020, p. 3). Within the humanities, this is linked to an academic culture where a mainstream understanding of success is associated with quantity rather than quality of outputs, making far-reaching conclusions regardless of having sufficient data, and consistently delivering ground-breaking, original and “impactful” research (Devine et al. , 2020, p. 2).…”

Section: A Closer Look At Failure Fieldwork and Ethnographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We aspire to facilitate a more sustained discussion about failure and join those who seek to normalize its role in scientific enquiry (see, e.g. Devine et al. , 2020, p. 4).…”

Section: “The Greatest Teacher Failure Is”: Navigating Failure In Eth...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Introducing “navigating failure in ethnography”: a forum about failure in ethnographic research

Verbuyst

Galazka

2023

JOE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe authors introduce a recurrent section for the Journal of Organizational Ethnography which scrutinizes the various manifestations and roles of failure in ethnographic research.Design/methodology/approachThe authors peruse a wide body of literature which tackles the role of failure in ethnographic research and draw on the experiences to argue for a more sustained and in-depth conversation on the topic.Findings“Failure” regularly occurs in ethnographic research, yet remains under-examined. Increased discussion on the topic will enrich debates on methodology and fieldwork in particular.Originality/valueWhile various scholars have commented on the role of “failure” in ethnographic research, an in-depth and sustained examination of the topic is lacking.

show abstract

Section: Failure Ethnography and Research In Neoliberal Academiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Closer Look At Failure Fieldwork and Ethnographymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Introducing “navigating failure in ethnography”: a forum about failure in ethnographic research

Verbuyst

Galazka

2023

JOE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rather, we believe that in talking about errors, scientists can learn about the do's and don'ts of their methods and concepts." (see their editorial piece for a more detailed explanation of the goals of the journal: Devine et al, 2020) • The Public school is concerned with accessibility of knowledge creation. It holds that truly impactful research requires societal engagement (citizen science), and the provision of understandable, accessible research outputs.…”

Section: Definitions Schools and Philosophymentioning

confidence: 99%

Charting the Constellation of Science Reform

Field¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decade, a sense of urgency has been building in the scientific community. They have discovered that much of the literature body is unreliable and possibly invalid thanks to weak theory, flawed methods, and shoddy statistics. This is driven by a widespread competitive, secretive approach to research, which, in turn, is fueled by toxic academic incentive structures. Many in the community have decided to address these issues, coming together in what has become known as the ‘scientific reform movement’. While these ‘reformers’ are often spoken of a single, homogeneous entity, my findings underscore the heterogeneity of the reform community. In my dissertation, I explore the scientific reform group using ethnography and social network analysis tools. I primarily studied their online Twitter engagements to understand their culture, practices, and structure. With Wenger’s Community of Practice theory as an interpretive framework, I analyze scientific reform discourse playing out between reformers on Twitter. Using quantitative Twitter friend/follow data, I investigate which reform members engage online, using following behavior to understand aspects of their social structure. I link the quantitative exploration with my qualitative analysis, to conclude that while the reformers are united by their interest in improving science, they are better characterized as a constellation of small communities of practice, each with their own norms, priorities, and unique approach to the group enterprise of scientific reform. My investigation is an exercise in reflexivity as I have studied a community in which I am an active part.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Charting the Constellation of Science Reform

Field¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychology's Crisis of Confidence Crises: Present and PastPsychology, like any other discipline of science, is dynamic, and, like many scientific disciplines, has undergone changes over time. It has experienced periods of prosperity and periods of unrest, with internal discourse shifting to match the field's focus. The current crisis of confidence is only psychology's latest. This section reviews the current crisis and the crisis of the 1970's in psychology, comparing and contrasting them to provide a context for some of the later content in this dissertation. The Current CrisisArguably, first signs of the current crisis can be traced back to 2005, when Stanford professor and epidemiologist John Ioannidis published the controversial essay: 'Why Most Published Research Findings are False'. It sketches out a theoretical analysis, arguing that more than half of published research results may be false positives, and should not be expected to replicate. Though it has been the target of heavy criticism, the article has made quite an impact since it was published (it has been cited by more than 10,000 other articles at the time of this writing, and is the most downloaded paper in the Public Library of Science). 1 Moreover, his assertions have been quantitatively reinforced since the essay was published (see, for instance, the OSC report which demonstrated that 61 out of 97 published significant results could not be successfully replicated: Open Science Collaboration, 2015).By some accounts, the concerning state of affairs in psychology had reached a kind of critical mass in around 2011, in the years since Ioannidis's paper was

show abstract

Science Fails. Let's Publish

Cited by 6 publications

References 9 publications

Introducing “navigating failure in ethnography”: a forum about failure in ethnographic research

Introducing “navigating failure in ethnography”: a forum about failure in ethnographic research

Charting the Constellation of Science Reform

Charting the Constellation of Science Reform

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About