Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.

To those involved in discussions about rigor, reproducibility, and replication in science, conversation about the "reproducibility crisis" appear ill-structured. Seemingly very different issues concerning the purity of reagents, accessibility of computational code, or misaligned incentives...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Nicole C Nelson, Kelsey Ichikawa, Julie Chung, Momin M Malik
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/9329c4334ce34927a155d1bc584aabf1
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:9329c4334ce34927a155d1bc584aabf1
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:9329c4334ce34927a155d1bc584aabf12021-12-02T20:09:20ZMapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0254090https://doaj.org/article/9329c4334ce34927a155d1bc584aabf12021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254090https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203To those involved in discussions about rigor, reproducibility, and replication in science, conversation about the "reproducibility crisis" appear ill-structured. Seemingly very different issues concerning the purity of reagents, accessibility of computational code, or misaligned incentives in academic research writ large are all collected up under this label. Prior work has attempted to address this problem by creating analytical definitions of reproducibility. We take a novel empirical, mixed methods approach to understanding variation in reproducibility discussions, using a combination of grounded theory and correspondence analysis to examine how a variety of authors narrate the story of the reproducibility crisis. Contrary to expectations, this analysis demonstrates that there is a clear thematic core to reproducibility discussions, centered on the incentive structure of science, the transparency of methods and data, and the need to reform academic publishing. However, we also identify three clusters of discussion that are distinct from the main body of articles: one focused on reagents, another on statistical methods, and a final cluster focused on the heterogeneity of the natural world. Although there are discursive differences between scientific and popular articles, we find no strong differences in how scientists and journalists write about the reproducibility crisis. Our findings demonstrate the value of using qualitative methods to identify the bounds and features of reproducibility discourse, and identify distinct vocabularies and constituencies that reformers should engage with to promote change.Nicole C NelsonKelsey IchikawaJulie ChungMomin M MalikPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 7, p e0254090 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Nicole C Nelson Kelsey Ichikawa Julie Chung Momin M Malik Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.
description	To those involved in discussions about rigor, reproducibility, and replication in science, conversation about the "reproducibility crisis" appear ill-structured. Seemingly very different issues concerning the purity of reagents, accessibility of computational code, or misaligned incentives in academic research writ large are all collected up under this label. Prior work has attempted to address this problem by creating analytical definitions of reproducibility. We take a novel empirical, mixed methods approach to understanding variation in reproducibility discussions, using a combination of grounded theory and correspondence analysis to examine how a variety of authors narrate the story of the reproducibility crisis. Contrary to expectations, this analysis demonstrates that there is a clear thematic core to reproducibility discussions, centered on the incentive structure of science, the transparency of methods and data, and the need to reform academic publishing. However, we also identify three clusters of discussion that are distinct from the main body of articles: one focused on reagents, another on statistical methods, and a final cluster focused on the heterogeneity of the natural world. Although there are discursive differences between scientific and popular articles, we find no strong differences in how scientists and journalists write about the reproducibility crisis. Our findings demonstrate the value of using qualitative methods to identify the bounds and features of reproducibility discourse, and identify distinct vocabularies and constituencies that reformers should engage with to promote change.
format	article
author	Nicole C Nelson Kelsey Ichikawa Julie Chung Momin M Malik
author_facet	Nicole C Nelson Kelsey Ichikawa Julie Chung Momin M Malik
author_sort	Nicole C Nelson
title	Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.
title_short	Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.
title_full	Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.
title_fullStr	Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.
title_full_unstemmed	Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.
title_sort	mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: a mixed methods analysis.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/9329c4334ce34927a155d1bc584aabf1
work_keys_str_mv	AT nicolecnelson mappingthediscursivedimensionsofthereproducibilitycrisisamixedmethodsanalysis AT kelseyichikawa mappingthediscursivedimensionsofthereproducibilitycrisisamixedmethodsanalysis AT juliechung mappingthediscursivedimensionsofthereproducibilitycrisisamixedmethodsanalysis AT mominmmalik mappingthediscursivedimensionsofthereproducibilitycrisisamixedmethodsanalysis
_version_	1718375077119000576

Mapping the discursive dimensions of the reproducibility crisis: A mixed methods analysis.

Ejemplares similares