Cargando…

The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review

Openness is one of the central values of science. Open scientific practices such as sharing data, materials and analysis scripts alongside published articles have many benefits, including easier replication and extension studies, increased availability of data for theory-building and meta-analysis,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Morey, Richard D., Chambers, Christopher D., Etchells, Peter J., Harris, Christine R., Hoekstra, Rink, Lakens, Daniël, Lewandowsky, Stephan, Morey, Candice Coker, Newman, Daniel P., Schönbrodt, Felix D., Vanpaemel, Wolf, Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan, Zwaan, Rolf A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society Publishing 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4736937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26909182
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150547
_version_ 1782413382686605312
author Morey, Richard D.
Chambers, Christopher D.
Etchells, Peter J.
Harris, Christine R.
Hoekstra, Rink
Lakens, Daniël
Lewandowsky, Stephan
Morey, Candice Coker
Newman, Daniel P.
Schönbrodt, Felix D.
Vanpaemel, Wolf
Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan
Zwaan, Rolf A.
author_facet Morey, Richard D.
Chambers, Christopher D.
Etchells, Peter J.
Harris, Christine R.
Hoekstra, Rink
Lakens, Daniël
Lewandowsky, Stephan
Morey, Candice Coker
Newman, Daniel P.
Schönbrodt, Felix D.
Vanpaemel, Wolf
Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan
Zwaan, Rolf A.
author_sort Morey, Richard D.
collection PubMed
description Openness is one of the central values of science. Open scientific practices such as sharing data, materials and analysis scripts alongside published articles have many benefits, including easier replication and extension studies, increased availability of data for theory-building and meta-analysis, and increased possibility of review and collaboration even after a paper has been published. Although modern information technology makes sharing easier than ever before, uptake of open practices had been slow. We suggest this might be in part due to a social dilemma arising from misaligned incentives and propose a specific, concrete mechanism—reviewers withholding comprehensive review—to achieve the goal of creating the expectation of open practices as a matter of scientific principle.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4736937
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Royal Society Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47369372016-02-23 The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review Morey, Richard D. Chambers, Christopher D. Etchells, Peter J. Harris, Christine R. Hoekstra, Rink Lakens, Daniël Lewandowsky, Stephan Morey, Candice Coker Newman, Daniel P. Schönbrodt, Felix D. Vanpaemel, Wolf Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan Zwaan, Rolf A. R Soc Open Sci Research Openness is one of the central values of science. Open scientific practices such as sharing data, materials and analysis scripts alongside published articles have many benefits, including easier replication and extension studies, increased availability of data for theory-building and meta-analysis, and increased possibility of review and collaboration even after a paper has been published. Although modern information technology makes sharing easier than ever before, uptake of open practices had been slow. We suggest this might be in part due to a social dilemma arising from misaligned incentives and propose a specific, concrete mechanism—reviewers withholding comprehensive review—to achieve the goal of creating the expectation of open practices as a matter of scientific principle. The Royal Society Publishing 2016-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4736937/ /pubmed/26909182 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150547 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ © 2016 The Authors. Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research
Morey, Richard D.
Chambers, Christopher D.
Etchells, Peter J.
Harris, Christine R.
Hoekstra, Rink
Lakens, Daniël
Lewandowsky, Stephan
Morey, Candice Coker
Newman, Daniel P.
Schönbrodt, Felix D.
Vanpaemel, Wolf
Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan
Zwaan, Rolf A.
The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review
title The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review
title_full The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review
title_fullStr The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review
title_full_unstemmed The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review
title_short The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review
title_sort peer reviewers' openness initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4736937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26909182
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150547
work_keys_str_mv AT moreyrichardd thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT chamberschristopherd thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT etchellspeterj thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT harrischristiner thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT hoekstrarink thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT lakensdaniel thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT lewandowskystephan thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT moreycandicecoker thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT newmandanielp thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT schonbrodtfelixd thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT vanpaemelwolf thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT wagenmakersericjan thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT zwaanrolfa thepeerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT moreyrichardd peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT chamberschristopherd peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT etchellspeterj peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT harrischristiner peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT hoekstrarink peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT lakensdaniel peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT lewandowskystephan peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT moreycandicecoker peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT newmandanielp peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT schonbrodtfelixd peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT vanpaemelwolf peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT wagenmakersericjan peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview
AT zwaanrolfa peerreviewersopennessinitiativeincentivizingopenresearchpracticesthroughpeerreview