Article Version of Record

Using Science and Psychology to improve the dissemination and evaluation of scientific work.

Author(s) / Creator(s)

Buttliere, B.

Other kind(s) of contributor

Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien

Abstract / Description

Here we examine what science can tell us about the problems in psychological publishing and how to best address those problems. First, the motivation behind questionable research practices is examined (the desire to get ahead or, at least, not fall behind). Next, behavior modification strategies are discussed, pointing out that the carrot works better than the stick. Finally, we suggest that the best way to achieve real change is to make a tool so useful that academics make time to learn and utilize it on their own. Implementation of current change initiatives is hindered by a lack of norms, high initial buy-in costs, and uncertain payoffs. With this in mind, we pull together current open science tools to increase the utility while lowering effort and risk. One, centralized, easy to use, platform, with a profile, a feed of targeted science stories based on previous system interaction, a sophisticated (public) comment and rating section, and impact metrics which use the available data can be used to realign individual and group motives. Some advantages of centrally digitizing communications are outlined, including ways the data could be used to improve the peer review process.

Persistent Identifier

Date of first publication

2014

Journal title

Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience

Volume

8

Publication status

publishedVersion

Review status

peerReviewed

Is version of

10.3389/fncom.2014.00082

Citation

  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Buttliere, B.
  • Other kind(s) of contributor
    Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien
  • PsychArchives acquisition timestamp
    2017-08-28T11:11:19Z
  • Made available on
    2017-08-28T11:11:19Z
  • Date of first publication
    2014
  • Abstract / Description
    Here we examine what science can tell us about the problems in psychological publishing and how to best address those problems. First, the motivation behind questionable research practices is examined (the desire to get ahead or, at least, not fall behind). Next, behavior modification strategies are discussed, pointing out that the carrot works better than the stick. Finally, we suggest that the best way to achieve real change is to make a tool so useful that academics make time to learn and utilize it on their own. Implementation of current change initiatives is hindered by a lack of norms, high initial buy-in costs, and uncertain payoffs. With this in mind, we pull together current open science tools to increase the utility while lowering effort and risk. One, centralized, easy to use, platform, with a profile, a feed of targeted science stories based on previous system interaction, a sophisticated (public) comment and rating section, and impact metrics which use the available data can be used to realign individual and group motives. Some advantages of centrally digitizing communications are outlined, including ways the data could be used to improve the peer review process.
  • Publication status
    publishedVersion
  • Review status
    peerReviewed
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/510
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.718
  • Is version of
    10.3389/fncom.2014.00082
  • Title
    Using Science and Psychology to improve the dissemination and evaluation of scientific work.
  • DRO type
    article
  • Leibniz institute name(s) / abbreviation(s)
    IWM
  • Leibniz subject classification
    Psychologie
  • Journal title
    Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
  • Volume
    8
  • Visible tag(s)
    Version of Record