This is a read only archive of pad.okfn.org. See the
Title: Preregistration for publications
This talk is about splitting the review process of publications in two part. First part one submit the research questions and methods e.g. The second step is about to collect the data. Depending on the review of the first part one can e.g. adapt the methods or the evaluation of data.
Moderator: * Johannes Breuer
Participants: Isabella Peters, Kendra Sticht,Clementine Le Roux, Thomas Gübitz, Roman Gurinovich
2-step review process
review processes on different levels/by different institutions (not only journals/publications)?: e.g., IRBs
"born-open" data (as an alternative/addition)
qualitative vs. quantitative data
transparencey & openness before and beyond preregistration
what about "data-driven" analyses?
splitting up data into several publications?
preregistration works well for some areas: e.g., quantitative experimental studies
confirmatory vs. exploratory analyses
(extra) workload for editors & reviewers
openness of data & materials
similarities to writing grant proposals? for review stage 1 in the preregistration process
does the preregistration process improve papers and, in the end, science?
mentorship/stewarship for papers? as an alternative/addition to peer review
authorship: reviewers as coauthors? acknowledgment of reviewers' work
"human factors" in the review process: subjectivity
more formalized paper & review structure
guidelines for review(er)s
questions by the authors that could be answered by the reviewers: what do they want feedback on?