Opportunities, challenges and tensions: Open science through a lens of qualitative social psychology
Authors: Pownall, M., Talbot, C.V., Kilby, L. and Branney, P.
Journal: British Journal of Social Psychology
Volume: 62
Issue: 4
Pages: 1581-1589
eISSN: 2044-8309
ISSN: 0144-6665
DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12628
Abstract:In recent years, there has been a focus in social psychology on efforts to improve the robustness, rigour, transparency and openness of psychological research. This has led to a plethora of new tools, practices and initiatives that each aim to combat questionable research practices and improve the credibility of social psychological scholarship. However, the majority of these efforts derive from quantitative, deductive, hypothesis-testing methodologies, and there has been a notable lack of in-depth exploration about what the tools, practices and values may mean for research that uses qualitative methodologies. Here, we introduce a Special Section of BJSP: Open Science, Qualitative Methods and Social Psychology: Possibilities and Tensions. The authors critically discuss a range of issues, including authorship, data sharing and broader research practices. Taken together, these papers urge the discipline to carefully consider the ontological, epistemological and methodological underpinnings of efforts to improve psychological science, and advocate for a critical appreciation of how mainstream open science discourse may (or may not) be compatible with the goals of qualitative research.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/38009/
Source: Scopus
Opportunities, challenges and tensions: Open science through a lens of qualitative social psychology.
Authors: Pownall, M., Talbot, C.V., Kilby, L. and Branney, P.
Journal: Br J Soc Psychol
Volume: 62
Issue: 4
Pages: 1581-1589
eISSN: 2044-8309
DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12628
Abstract:In recent years, there has been a focus in social psychology on efforts to improve the robustness, rigour, transparency and openness of psychological research. This has led to a plethora of new tools, practices and initiatives that each aim to combat questionable research practices and improve the credibility of social psychological scholarship. However, the majority of these efforts derive from quantitative, deductive, hypothesis-testing methodologies, and there has been a notable lack of in-depth exploration about what the tools, practices and values may mean for research that uses qualitative methodologies. Here, we introduce a Special Section of BJSP: Open Science, Qualitative Methods and Social Psychology: Possibilities and Tensions. The authors critically discuss a range of issues, including authorship, data sharing and broader research practices. Taken together, these papers urge the discipline to carefully consider the ontological, epistemological and methodological underpinnings of efforts to improve psychological science, and advocate for a critical appreciation of how mainstream open science discourse may (or may not) be compatible with the goals of qualitative research.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/38009/
Source: PubMed
Opportunities, challenges and tensions: Open science through a lens of qualitative social psychology
Authors: Pownall, M., Talbot, C.V., Kilby, L. and Branney, P.
Journal: BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volume: 62
Issue: 4
Pages: 1581-1589
eISSN: 2044-8309
ISSN: 0144-6665
DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12628
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/38009/
Source: Web of Science (Lite)
Opportunities, Challenges, and Tensions: Open Science through a lens of Qualitative Social Psychology
Authors: Pownall, M., Talbot, C., Kilby, L. and Branney, P.
Journal: British Journal of Social Psychology
Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
ISSN: 0144-6665
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/38009/
Source: Manual
Opportunities, challenges and tensions: Open science through a lens of qualitative social psychology.
Authors: Pownall, M., Talbot, C.V., Kilby, L. and Branney, P.
Journal: The British journal of social psychology
Volume: 62
Issue: 4
Pages: 1581-1589
eISSN: 2044-8309
ISSN: 0144-6665
DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12628
Abstract:In recent years, there has been a focus in social psychology on efforts to improve the robustness, rigour, transparency and openness of psychological research. This has led to a plethora of new tools, practices and initiatives that each aim to combat questionable research practices and improve the credibility of social psychological scholarship. However, the majority of these efforts derive from quantitative, deductive, hypothesis-testing methodologies, and there has been a notable lack of in-depth exploration about what the tools, practices and values may mean for research that uses qualitative methodologies. Here, we introduce a Special Section of BJSP: Open Science, Qualitative Methods and Social Psychology: Possibilities and Tensions. The authors critically discuss a range of issues, including authorship, data sharing and broader research practices. Taken together, these papers urge the discipline to carefully consider the ontological, epistemological and methodological underpinnings of efforts to improve psychological science, and advocate for a critical appreciation of how mainstream open science discourse may (or may not) be compatible with the goals of qualitative research.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/38009/
Source: Europe PubMed Central
Opportunities, Challenges, and Tensions: Open Science through a lens of Qualitative Social Psychology
Authors: Pownall, M., Talbot, C., Kilby, L. and Branney, P.
Journal: British Journal of Social Psychology
Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
ISSN: 0144-6665
Abstract:In recent years, there has been a focus in social psychology on efforts to improve the robustness, rigour, transparency, and openness of psychological research. This has led to a plethora of new tools, practices, and initiatives that each aim to combat questionable research practices and improve the credibility of social psychological scholarship. However, the majority of these efforts derive from quantitative, deductive, hypothesis-testing methodologies, and there has been a notable lack of in-depth exploration about what the tools, practices, and values may mean for research which uses qualitative methodologies.
Here, we introduce a Special Section of BJSP: Open Science, Qualitative Methods and Social Psychology: Possibilities and Tensions. Authors critically discuss a range of issues, including authorship, data sharing, and broader research practices. Taken together, these papers urge the discipline to carefully consider the ontological, epistemological and methodological underpinnings of efforts to improve psychological science, and advocate for a critical appreciation of how mainstream open science discourse may (or may not) be compatible with the goals of qualitative research.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/38009/
https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/20448309
Source: BURO EPrints