Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
sigmoid.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A social space for people researching, working with, or just interested in AI!

Administered by:

Server stats:

572
active users

sigmoid.social: AboutProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.4.3

#openmethods

0 posts0 participants0 posts today
Anne Baillot

One thing we are working on in the ATRIUM project is the assessment of non-traditional research outputs in the Humanities. I have written a blogpost to explain why, what and how: dariahopen.hypotheses.org/2113 #openmethods #ATRIUMproject #overlayjournals #openaccess #researchassessment cc @dariaheu

DARIAH OpenAssessing non-traditional academic formats: the hidden traps to the treasure troveThe advent of digital methods has contributed to raising awareness of hitherto neglected methodological bricks and activities adjacent to (and relevant for) the production of knowledge. Academia traditionally values research outputs published in an authoritative version like monographs and research papers. Yet, digital approaches have shown that iterative processes as well as the intermediate work steps are necessary to write the research papers in the first place.
Marcel LaFlamme

Kicking off 2024 with a new :OpenAccess: publication in PeerJ!

Our survey found that researchers view the Methods section of published articles as inadequate to reproduce results or reuse techniques.

Yet more detailed methods information gets shared privately rather than publicly, limiting discoverability and equity.

#OpenScience #OpenMethods

peerj.com/articles/16731/

PeerJA survey of researchers’ methods sharing practices and prioritiesMissing or inaccessible information about the methods used in scientific research slows the pace of discovery and hampers reproducibility. Yet little is known about how, why, and under what conditions researchers share detailed methods information, or about how such practices vary across social categories like career stage, field, and region. In this exploratory study, we surveyed 997 active researchers about their attitudes and behaviors with respect to methods sharing. The most common approach reported by respondents was private sharing upon request, but a substantial minority (33%) had publicly shared detailed methods information independently of their research findings. The most widely used channels for public sharing were connected to peer-reviewed publications, while the most significant barriers to public sharing were found to be lack of time and lack of awareness about how or where to share. Insofar as respondents were moderately satisfied with their ability to accomplish various goals associated with methods sharing, we conclude that efforts to increase public sharing may wish to focus on enhancing and building awareness of existing solutions—even as future research should seek to understand the needs of methods users and the extent to which they align with prevailing practices of sharing.
TrendingLive feeds
About