首页> 外文期刊>Perspectives on Psychological Science >A Short (Personal) Future History of Revolution 2.0
【24h】

A Short (Personal) Future History of Revolution 2.0

机译:简短的(个人)未来革命史2.0

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Crisis of replicability is one term that psychological scientists use for the current introspective phase we are inI argue instead that we are going through a revolution analogous to a political revolution. Revolution 2.0 is an uprising focused on how we should be doing science now (i.e., in a 2.0 world). The precipitating events of the revolution have already been well-documented: failures to replicate, questionable research practices, fraud, etc. And the fact that none of these events is new to our field has also been well-documented. I suggest four interconnected reasons as to why this time is different: changing technology, changing demographics of researchers, limited resources, and misaligned incentives. I then describe two reasons why the revolution is more likely to catch on this time: technology (as part of the solution) and the fact that these concerns cut across social and life sciencesthat is, we are not alone. Neither side in the revolution has behaved well, and each has characterized the other in extreme terms (although, of course, each has had a few extreme actors). Some suggested reforms are already taking hold (e.g., journals asking for more transparency in methods and analysis decisions; journals publishing replications) but the feared tyrannical requirements have, of course, not taken root (e.g., few journals require open data; there is no ban on exploratory analyses). Still, we have not yet made needed advances in the ways in which we accumulate, connect, and extract conclusions from our aggregated research. However, we are now ready to move forward by adopting incremental changes and by acknowledging the multiplicity of goals within psychological science.
机译:可复制性的危机是心理学家在当前自省阶段所使用的一个术语,我认为我们正在经历一场类似于政治革命的革命。 Revolution 2.0是一场起义,专注于我们现在应该如何做科学(即在2.0世界中)。革命性的突发事件已被充分记录在案:复制失败,可疑的研究实践,欺诈等。而且这些事件都不是我们领域新手的事实也已得到充分记录。对于这次不同的原因,我提出了四个相互关联的原因:技术变化,研究人员的人口统计变化,资源有限以及激励措施错位。然后,我描述为什么革命更可能在这个时候流行的两个原因:技术(作为解决方案的一部分)以及这些关注点涉及社会科学和生命科学的事实,也就是说,我们并不孤单。革命的任何一方都没有表现良好,并且双方都在极端方面表现出了对方的特征(尽管,当然,每个方面都有一些极端参与者)。一些建议的改革已经开始实施(例如,期刊要求方法和分析决策更加透明;期刊发布复制品),但是担心的专横性要求却没有扎根(例如,很少期刊需要公开数据;没有禁止探索性分析)。尽管如此,我们在积累,连接和从汇总研究中得出结论的方式上还没有取得任何进展。但是,我们现在准备通过采用渐进式变化并承认心理学中目标的多样性来向前迈进。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号