Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://lib.hpu.edu.vn/handle/123456789/21907
Title: | Open research practices |
Authors: | D. V. M. Bishop |
Keywords: | Psychology Cognitive neuroscience Neuroscience Psychology Health Disease Epidemiology Data-sharing Reproducibility Data-dredging, Ethics |
Issue Date: | 2016 |
Abstract: | The Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative (PROI) is a move to enlist reviewers in the promotion of data-sharing. In this commentary, I discuss objections that can be raised, first to the specific proposals in the PROI, and second to data-sharing in general. I argue that although many objections have strong counter-arguments, others merit more serious consideration. Regarding the PROI, I suggest that it could backfire if editors and authors feel coerced into data-sharing and so may not be the most pragmatic way of encouraging greater openness. More generally, while promoting data-sharing, we need to be sensitive to cases where sharing of data from human participants could create ethical problems. Furthermore, those interested in promoting reproducible science need to defend against an increased risk of data-dredging when large, multivariable datasets are shared. I end with some suggestions to avoid these unintended consequences. |
URI: | https://lib.hpu.edu.vn/handle/123456789/21907 |
Appears in Collections: | Education |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
0273_Openresearchpractices.pdf Restricted Access | 417.24 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.