five

Re-Building Trust

收藏
PsychArchives2020-02-04 更新2026-04-25 收录
下载链接:
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/2133.2
下载链接
链接失效反馈
官方服务:
资源简介:
The Replication Crisis diminishes trust in empirical sciences and with it the perceived value of science (Lupia, 2018, 10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_41). Open Science Practices (i.a. open data, open analysis script, open materials) are an increasingly popular approach to deal with challenges in replication and to rebuilt trust (Geukes et al, 2016, 10.1026/1612-5010/a000167). First investigations could, however, deliver no evidence toward the effect of Open Science Practices (OSP) on trustworthiness (Wingen, Berkessel & Englich, 2019, 10.31219/osf.io/4ukq5). The study investigated the effect on a discipline level (psychology) with an abstract description of OSP. Within the ongoing discussion about incentives for OSP (e.g. badges for OSP), we want to shift the focus from discipline level to concrete individual journal articles and consider epistemic beliefs of readers to play a role (Merk & Rosman, 2018, 10.31219/osf.io/cduqe): Will visible OSP (vs. not visible vs. visibly non-OSP) foster perceived trustworthiness when reading journal articles of empirical studies? Will multiplistic epistemic beliefs moderate the relationship between OSP and trustworthiness? other
提供机构:
PsychArchives
创建时间:
2020-02-04
5,000+
优质数据集
54 个
任务类型
进入经典数据集
二维码
社区交流群

面向社区/商业的数据集话题

二维码
科研交流群

面向高校/科研机构的开源数据集话题

数据驱动未来

携手共赢发展

商业合作