3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      When open data closes the door: A critical examination of the past, present and the potential future for open data guidelines in journals

      other

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Opening data promises to improve research rigour and democratize knowledge production. But it also presents practical, theoretical, and ethical considerations for qualitative researchers in particular. Discussion about open data in qualitative social psychology predates the replication crisis. However, the nuances of this ongoing discussion have not been translated into current journal guidelines on open data. In this article, we summarize ongoing debates about open data from qualitative perspectives, and through a content analysis of 261 journals we establish the state of current journal policies for open data in the domain of social psychology. We critically discuss how current common expectations for open data may not be adequate for establishing qualitative rigour, can introduce ethical challenges, and may place those who wish to use qualitative approaches at a disadvantage in peer review and publication processes. We advise that future open data guidelines should aim to reflect the nuance of arguments surrounding data sharing in qualitative research, and move away from a universal “one‐size‐fits‐all” approach to data sharing. This article outlines the past, present, and the potential future of open data guidelines in social‐psychological journals. We conclude by offering recommendations for how journals might more inclusively consider the use of open data in qualitative methods, whilst recognizing and allowing space for the diverse perspectives, needs, and contexts of all forms of social‐psychological research.

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.

          Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS. Promoting an open research culture.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ap832@bath.ac.uk
                Journal
                Br J Soc Psychol
                Br J Soc Psychol
                10.1111/(ISSN)2044-8309
                BJSO
                The British Journal of Social Psychology
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0144-6665
                2044-8309
                08 September 2022
                October 2023
                : 62
                : 4 , Special Section: Open Science, Qualitative Methods and Social Psychology: Possibilities and Tensions ( doiID: 10.1111/bjso.v62.4 )
                : 1635-1653
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Psychology University of Bath Bath UK
                [ 2 ] Department of Social Care and Social Work Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester UK
                [ 3 ] School of Psychology The University of Queensland St Lucia Queensland Australia
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Annayah M. B. Prosser, Department of Psychology, University of Bath, UK.

                Email: ap832@ 123456bath.ac.uk

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2381-9556
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7671-7217
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1447-7200
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8676-5394
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3817-129X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5664-998X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1595-5574
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5047-3920
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8310-4021
                Article
                BJSO12576 BJSP.21.0339
                10.1111/bjso.12576
                10946880
                36076340
                b1af3325-76a8-4b07-a3e3-23ff09c3af72
                © 2022 The Authors. British Journal of Social Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 September 2021
                : 17 August 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 4, Pages: 1, Words: 11900
                Funding
                Funded by: Economic and Social Research Council , doi 10.13039/501100000269;
                Categories
                Special Section Paper
                Special Section: Open Science, Qualitative Methods and Social Psychology: Possibilities and Tensions
                Special Section Papers
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                October 2023
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.3.9 mode:remove_FC converted:18.03.2024

                content analysis,ethics,journal guidelines,journals,open data,open science,psychology,qualitative,qualitative methods,quantitative,social psychology,social sciences

                Comments

                Comment on this article