Short Abstract

Can the mosaic of metascience studies and stakeholders be re-configured to provide a more coherent and joined-up picture of the world of research? This session will explore different aspects of the fragmentation of metascience and discuss measures that might foster greater synergy and inclusion.

Long Abstract

This session is focused on reproducibility, transparency and questionable research practices. Lina Koppel presents findings from a survey where they asked 11,050 researchers in Sweden about their views on potential causes of the replication crisis and the extent to which various interventions can increase science’s credibility. Odd Erik Gundersen will talk about the replications of 22 AI studies that either publicly shared code and data or only data with a 50% success rate. David Valenta’s paper focuses on examining the impact of AI integration in reproducibility assessments of social science research. Maria Jones and Luis Eduardo San Martin discuss learnings for metascience, share institutional lessons, and present a roadmap for alliances toward standardizing and increasing transparency based on the initiative launched by the World Bank to enhance reproducibility. Tom Hardwicke estimated the prevalence of transparent research practices (e.g., data sharing & preregistration) in psychology by manually examining 400 randomly sampled empirical articles, where transparency increased modestly between 2017-2022, but continues to be widely neglected. Lastly, Jane Hergert identified and categorized 40 QRPs in quantitative research, creating a taxonomy that enhances transparency and helps mitigate QRPs, contributing to research integrity and metascience.