• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

有人愿意分享吗?社会科学中代码共享行为的实验证据。

Care to share? Experimental evidence on code sharing behavior in the social sciences.

机构信息

Department of Sociology, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2023 Aug 7;18(8):e0289380. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289380. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0289380
PMID:37549146
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10406284/
Abstract

Transparency and peer control are cornerstones of good scientific practice and entail the replication and reproduction of findings. The feasibility of replications, however, hinges on the premise that original researchers make their data and research code publicly available. This applies in particular to large-N observational studies, where analysis code is complex and may involve several ambiguous analytical decisions. To investigate which specific factors influence researchers' code sharing behavior upon request, we emailed code requests to 1,206 authors who published research articles based on data from the European Social Survey between 2015 and 2020. In this preregistered multifactorial field experiment, we randomly varied three aspects of our code request's wording in a 2x4x2 factorial design: the overall framing of our request (enhancement of social science research, response to replication crisis), the appeal why researchers should share their code (FAIR principles, academic altruism, prospect of citation, no information), and the perceived effort associated with code sharing (no code cleaning required, no information). Overall, 37.5% of successfully contacted authors supplied their analysis code. Of our experimental treatments, only framing affected researchers' code sharing behavior, though in the opposite direction we expected: Scientists who received the negative wording alluding to the replication crisis were more likely to share their research code. Taken together, our results highlight that the availability of research code will hardly be enhanced by small-scale individual interventions but instead requires large-scale institutional norms.

摘要

透明度和同行监督是良好科学实践的基石,需要对研究结果进行复制和再现。然而,可重复性的前提是原始研究人员公开其数据和研究代码。这尤其适用于大 N 观察性研究,其中分析代码复杂,并且可能涉及几个模糊的分析决策。为了研究哪些具体因素会影响研究人员根据请求共享代码的行为,我们向 1206 名作者发送了代码请求,这些作者根据 2015 年至 2020 年期间的欧洲社会调查数据发表了研究文章。在这个预先注册的多因素现场实验中,我们在 2x4x2 析因设计中随机改变了我们代码请求措辞的三个方面:请求的总体框架(增强社会科学研究,回应复制危机)、呼吁研究人员共享代码的原因(FAIR 原则、学术利他主义、引用前景、无信息)以及与代码共享相关的感知工作量(无需代码清理,无信息)。总的来说,成功联系到的作者中有 37.5%提供了他们的分析代码。在我们的实验处理中,只有框架影响了研究人员的代码共享行为,尽管与我们预期的方向相反:收到暗示复制危机的负面措辞的科学家更有可能共享他们的研究代码。总的来说,我们的研究结果表明,通过小规模的个体干预几乎不可能提高研究代码的可用性,而是需要大规模的机构规范。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/ff04bba75810/pone.0289380.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/5a9b2c0b9186/pone.0289380.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/a0d24dcf53f4/pone.0289380.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/7fd3c4cd1bc2/pone.0289380.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/f3e90d59af78/pone.0289380.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/1d0bbd3dd1fe/pone.0289380.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/ff04bba75810/pone.0289380.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/5a9b2c0b9186/pone.0289380.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/a0d24dcf53f4/pone.0289380.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/7fd3c4cd1bc2/pone.0289380.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/f3e90d59af78/pone.0289380.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/1d0bbd3dd1fe/pone.0289380.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc32/10406284/ff04bba75810/pone.0289380.g006.jpg

相似文献

1
Care to share? Experimental evidence on code sharing behavior in the social sciences.有人愿意分享吗?社会科学中代码共享行为的实验证据。
PLoS One. 2023 Aug 7;18(8):e0289380. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289380. eCollection 2023.
2
How often do cancer researchers make their data and code available and what factors are associated with sharing?癌症研究人员多久会分享他们的数据和代码,以及哪些因素与分享有关?
BMC Med. 2022 Nov 9;20(1):438. doi: 10.1186/s12916-022-02644-2.
3
A data-sharing agreement helps to increase researchers' willingness to share primary data: results from a randomized controlled trial.数据共享协议有助于提高研究人员分享原始数据的意愿:一项随机对照试验的结果。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Feb;106:60-69. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.10.006. Epub 2018 Oct 19.
4
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
5
Rates and predictors of data and code sharing in the medical and health sciences: Protocol for a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.在医学和健康科学领域中数据和代码共享的比率和预测因素:一项系统评价和个体参与者数据荟萃分析的研究方案。
F1000Res. 2021 Jun 22;10:491. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.53874.2. eCollection 2021.
6
Characteristics of available studies and dissemination of research using major clinical data sharing platforms.可用研究的特征和利用主要临床数据共享平台进行的研究传播。
Clin Trials. 2021 Dec;18(6):657-666. doi: 10.1177/17407745211038524. Epub 2021 Aug 18.
7
A survey of researchers' code sharing and code reuse practices, and assessment of interactive notebook prototypes.研究者代码共享和代码复用实践调查,以及交互式笔记本原型评估。
PeerJ. 2022 Aug 22;10:e13933. doi: 10.7717/peerj.13933. eCollection 2022.
8
Data sharing in medical research: an empirical investigation.医学研究中的数据共享:一项实证调查。
Bioethics. 2001 Apr;15(2):125-34. doi: 10.1111/1467-8519.00220.
9
A survey of researchers' methods sharing practices and priorities.研究者方法共享实践与优先事项调查。
PeerJ. 2024 Jan 3;12:e16731. doi: 10.7717/peerj.16731. eCollection 2024.
10
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Recommendations for sharing network data and materials.共享网络数据和材料的建议。
Netw Sci (Camb Univ Press). 2024 Dec;12(4):404-417. doi: 10.1017/nws.2024.16. Epub 2024 Oct 30.
2
The reliability of replications: a study in computational reproductions.复制的可靠性:一项关于计算再现的研究。
R Soc Open Sci. 2025 Mar 19;12(3):241038. doi: 10.1098/rsos.241038. eCollection 2025 Mar.

本文引用的文献

1
Observing many researchers using the same data and hypothesis reveals a hidden universe of uncertainty.观察到许多研究人员使用相同的数据和假设,揭示了一个隐藏的不确定宇宙。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Nov;119(44):e2203150119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2203150119. Epub 2022 Oct 28.
2
Investigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology.探究癌症生物学的临床前可重复性。
Elife. 2021 Dec 7;10:e71601. doi: 10.7554/eLife.71601.
3
Nudging toward vaccination: a systematic review.推动疫苗接种:系统评价。
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Sep;6(9). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006237.
4
Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines.数据共享实践和根据请求提供数据的可用性因科学学科而异。
Sci Data. 2021 Jul 27;8(1):192. doi: 10.1038/s41597-021-00981-0.
5
A study of the impact of data sharing on article citations using journal policies as a natural experiment.利用期刊政策作为自然实验研究数据共享对文章引用的影响。
PLoS One. 2019 Dec 18;14(12):e0225883. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225883. eCollection 2019.
6
Why researchers should share their analytic code.为什么研究人员应该分享他们的分析代码。
BMJ. 2019 Nov 21;367:l6365. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6365.
7
Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015.评估 2010 年至 2015 年期间《自然》和《科学》杂志上社会科学实验的可重复性。
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Sep;2(9):637-644. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z. Epub 2018 Aug 27.
8
Early Career Researchers Embrace Data Sharing.青年研究者拥抱数据共享。
Trends Ecol Evol. 2019 Feb;34(2):95-98. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2018.11.010. Epub 2018 Dec 17.
9
Social nudging: The effect of social feedback interventions on vaccine uptake.社会推动:社会反馈干预对疫苗接种率的影响。
Health Psychol. 2018 Nov;37(11):1045-1054. doi: 10.1037/hea0000668. Epub 2018 Sep 17.
10
Populating the Data Ark: An attempt to retrieve, preserve, and liberate data from the most highly-cited psychology and psychiatry articles.数据方舟计划:从最具影响力的心理学和精神病学文章中检索、保存和释放数据的尝试。
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 2;13(8):e0201856. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201856. eCollection 2018.