ReproducibiliTea is an interdisciplinary journal club for all things related to research transparency and reproducibility started in Oxford and since spread to 14 countries! The new Princeton ReproducibiliTea chapter is one of only a handful of groups in the US meeting to discuss readings and how research reproducibility plays out in our own experiences.
This semester we will be meeting most Wednesdays from 3:00-4:00 p.m. in Peretsman Scully Hall 411. Coffee, tea, and refreshments will be provided!
OSF Repository: https://osf.io/af4td/
Join the Listserv for updates: https://tinyurl.com/sshhkjd
SPRING 2020 Schedule, Readings, and Guests:
February 5: What is ethical research?
Guest: Dr. Betsy Levy Paluck, Professor of Psychology and Public Affairs
Christensen, G., Freese, J., & Miguel, E. (2019). What Is Ethical Research? In Transparent and Reproducible Social Science Research: How to Do Open Science (pp. 11-28). Oakland, California: University of California Press. www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvpb3xkg.7
February 12: Examining analytic flexibility and why it is a problem
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-Positive Psychology. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
February 19: The problem defined: the general overview
Munafo et al. 2017. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(1), 21. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-016-0021
February 26: Break
March 4: Questionable Research Practices
Guest: Dr. Wind Cowles, Princeton Research Data Service
John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524–532. www.jstor.org/stable/41489734
March 11: Reproducibility Now: Many studies don’t reproduce and why.
Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716-aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
March 18: Break
March 25: Has the debate gone too far? Things will just turn out fine, won’t they?
Pashler, H., & Harris, C. R. (2012). Is the Replicability Crisis Overblown? Three Arguments Examined. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 531–536 www.jstor.org/stable/44282602
April 1: Analytical flexibility illustrated
Silberzahn, R., et al. (2018). Many Analysts, One Data Set: Making Transparent How Variations in Analytic Choices Affect Results. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(3), 337–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245917747646
April 8: And the future? The myth of self-correction.
Smaldino, P. E., & McElreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science. Royal Society Open Science, 3(9), 160384. https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.09511
April 15: Making neuroimaging reproducible
Guests: Pygers, the Princeton Neuroimaging Support Group
Poldrack, R. A., Baker, C. I., Durnez, J., Gorgolewski, K. J., Matthews, P. M., Munafò, M. R., … Yarkoni, T. (2017). Scanning the horizon: towards transparent and reproducible neuroimaging research. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18, 115. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.167
Co-facilitators: Robin Gomila and Meghan Testerman
Sponsored by Dr. Betsy Levy Paluck and the Princeton University Library
Hosted by the Department of Psychology