An Introduction to Metascience: The Discipline of Evaluating the Creation and Dissemination of Research
Autor Gabriel Bennett, Emma Goodallen Limba Engleză Paperback – 13 sep 2024
This book stands alone as a comprehensive guide to metascience, offering readers a singular resource for understanding and implementing metascientific principles into their research practices. Readers will find this book invaluable for perfecting their research skills and enhancing the quality of their academic work. It exposes the reader to the intricacies of research processes, prompting a reevaluation of preconceived notions and fostering a deeper understanding of the flaws and solutions inherent in knowledge creation. Furthermore, it offers thought-provoking insights into implementing strategies to enhance research productivity, and it elucidates both the benefits and pitfalls of incorporating artificial intelligence in research production.
Designed for scientists and researchers seeking to gain insight into the scientific process, An Introduction to Metascience caters to those interested in understanding how research evolves over time. It appeals to individuals eager to explore methods, practices, and philosophies of science to refine their approach to knowledge creation.
| Toate formatele și edițiile | Preț | Express |
|---|---|---|
| Paperback (1) | 288.86 lei 22-36 zile | +22.84 lei 5-11 zile |
| Taylor & Francis – 13 sep 2024 | 288.86 lei 22-36 zile | +22.84 lei 5-11 zile |
| Hardback (1) | 932.20 lei 43-57 zile | |
| Taylor & Francis – 13 sep 2024 | 932.20 lei 43-57 zile |
Preț: 288.86 lei
Nou
Puncte Express: 433
Preț estimativ în valută:
55.28€ • 57.42$ • 45.92£
55.28€ • 57.42$ • 45.92£
Carte disponibilă
Livrare economică 13-27 ianuarie 25
Livrare express 27 decembrie 24 - 02 ianuarie 25 pentru 32.83 lei
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76
Specificații
ISBN-13: 9781032769066
ISBN-10: 1032769068
Pagini: 248
Ilustrații: 72
Dimensiuni: 174 x 246 x 21 mm
Greutate: 0.46 kg
Ediția:1
Editura: Taylor & Francis
Colecția Routledge
Locul publicării:Oxford, United Kingdom
ISBN-10: 1032769068
Pagini: 248
Ilustrații: 72
Dimensiuni: 174 x 246 x 21 mm
Greutate: 0.46 kg
Ediția:1
Editura: Taylor & Francis
Colecția Routledge
Locul publicării:Oxford, United Kingdom
Public țintă
Postgraduate, Undergraduate Advanced, and Undergraduate CoreCuprins
1 An introduction to metascience 1
1.1 What is metascience?
1.2 The intended audience of this book
1.3 Pedagogical features in this book
1.4 Summary of the upcoming chapters
1.4.1 Chapter 2 – Mitigating biases during the production and dissemination of research
1.4.2 Chapter 3 – Journalology: the science of publishing
1.4.3 Chapter 4 – The impact of funding agencies on the production of research
1.4.4 Chapter 5 – Improving the culture in research workplaces
1.4.5 Chapter 6 – Understanding and addressing QRPs
1.4.6 Chapter 7 – Addressing the reproducibility crisis
1.4.7 Chapter 8 – Ethics and metascience
References
2 Mitigating biases during the production and dissemination of research
2.1 Overview of biases in research
2.2 Biases whilst designing a study
2.2.1 Ethnocentric bias
2.2.2 Gender bias
2.3 Biases during data collection and analysis
2.3.1 Cognitive bias
2.3.2 Confirmation bias
2.3.3 Selection bias
2.3.4 Data collection bias
2.3.5 Measurement bias
2.3.6 Search engine bias
2.4 Biases during the reporting and dissemination of research
2.4.1 Time‑lag bias
2.4.2 Place of publication bias
2.4.3 Citation bias
2.4.4 Checklists to detect bias in manuscripts
2.5 Biases in artificial intelligence
2.5.1 The role of artificial intelligence in the creation of literature reviews
2.5.2 Limitations of AI
2.6 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
3 Journalology: the science of publishing
3.1 A description and historical origins of journalology
3.2 The peer review process
3.3 Issues and potential improvements of the peer review process
3.3.1 Making peer review a teamwork effort
3.3.2 Avoiding publication bias and increasing transparency
3.3.3 Improving the accuracy of the peer review process
3.3.4 Reducing the duration of the peer review process
3.3.5 Other suggestions to improve the peer review process
3.4 Preprinted articles
3.5 The creation of predatory publishers and Beall’s list
3.6 Consequences of predatory journals
3.6.1 Corrupting research
3.6.2 Undermining the training of scholars
3.6.3 Increased email correspondence to academics
3.7 Checklists and flow diagrams to identify predatory journals
3.8 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
4 Impact of funding agencies on the production of research
4.1 Improving the grant application process
4.1.1 Implementing a two‑stage application process
4.1.2 Overcoming the ‘incumbency advantage’
4.1.3 Multiple application opportunities to reduce application burden and stress
4.1.4 Improving the quality of feedback that unsuccessful applicants receive
4.2 How funding agencies can improve the quality of research
4.2.1 Improving the evaluation of knowledge translation in research proposals
4.2.2 Addressing sex and gender bias in research
4.2.3 Preventing inappropriate influence by funding agencies
4.2.4 Making research reproducible
4.3 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
5 Improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia
5.1 Academic bullying
5.1.1 Overview of academic bullying
5.1.2 Factors that can cause and exacerbate academic bullying
5.1.3 Strategies to reduce academic bullying
5.2 Racism in research workplaces
5.3 Women in academia
5.3.1 Women’s participation in academia
5.3.2 Factors that inhibit the inclusion and promotion of women in academia
5.3.3 Improving the inclusion, retention, and promotion of women in academia
5.4 General recommendations for improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia
5.4.1 Changes to publishing policies
5.4.2 The role of universities and academic institutions
5.4.3 The role of funding agencies
5.5 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
6 Understanding and addressing questionable research practices
6.1 Defining questionable research practices
6.1.1 Cherry picking
6.1.2 P‑hacking
6.1.3 Hypothesising After Results are Known
6.2 Occurrence of questionable research practices
6.3 Strategies to reduce questionable research practices
6.3.1 Using evidence‑based language
6.3.2 Justifying specific tests for p‑values
6.3.3 Pre‑registering a study’s design
6.3.4 Reforming grant awarding agencies
6.3.5 Educating scholars about questionable research practices
6.3.6 Creating reporting procedures
6.3.7 Reforming the ‘publish or perish’ culture
6.3.8 Removing any financial incentives for academic publishing
6.3.9 Creating an independent research integrity agency
6.3.10 Making researchers pledge an oath to uphold research integrity
6.3.11 Developing a confidential reporting system
6.3.12 Aubert Bonn and colleagues’ suggestions about improving research integrity
6.4 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
7 Addressing the reproducibility crisis
7.1 Defining reproducibility
7.2 Consequences of irreproducible research
7.3 Strategies to increase reproducible research
7.3.1 Publishing datasets
7.3.2 Establishing journals that only publish replication studies
7.3.3 Teaching academic staff about reproducibility
7.3.4 Open Science Badges
7.3.5 Incorporating reproducibility requirements into the criteria for research funding
7.3.6 Reforming academic hiring practices to promote reproducible research
7.3.7 Pre‑registering studies
7.3.8 Improving the readability of a study’s methodology
7.3.9 Improving the clarity of conference presentations
7.3.10 Requiring researchers to self‑examine their previous research
7.4 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
8 Human Research Ethics Committees and Metascience
8.1 The creation of Human Research Ethics Committees
8.2 Operational issues with Human Research Ethics Committees
8.2.1 Providing ethics training to applicants
8.2.2 Educating members of Human Research Ethics Committees to examine ethics applications
8.2.3 Interactive ethics presentations
8.2.4 Retrospective ethics reviews
8.2.5 Participant feedback to ethics committees
8.2.6 Creating consistent policies for Health Research Ethics Committees
8.2.7 Reducing HREC application rejection rates
8.3 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
9 Final remarks
References
1.1 What is metascience?
1.2 The intended audience of this book
1.3 Pedagogical features in this book
1.4 Summary of the upcoming chapters
1.4.1 Chapter 2 – Mitigating biases during the production and dissemination of research
1.4.2 Chapter 3 – Journalology: the science of publishing
1.4.3 Chapter 4 – The impact of funding agencies on the production of research
1.4.4 Chapter 5 – Improving the culture in research workplaces
1.4.5 Chapter 6 – Understanding and addressing QRPs
1.4.6 Chapter 7 – Addressing the reproducibility crisis
1.4.7 Chapter 8 – Ethics and metascience
References
2 Mitigating biases during the production and dissemination of research
2.1 Overview of biases in research
2.2 Biases whilst designing a study
2.2.1 Ethnocentric bias
2.2.2 Gender bias
2.3 Biases during data collection and analysis
2.3.1 Cognitive bias
2.3.2 Confirmation bias
2.3.3 Selection bias
2.3.4 Data collection bias
2.3.5 Measurement bias
2.3.6 Search engine bias
2.4 Biases during the reporting and dissemination of research
2.4.1 Time‑lag bias
2.4.2 Place of publication bias
2.4.3 Citation bias
2.4.4 Checklists to detect bias in manuscripts
2.5 Biases in artificial intelligence
2.5.1 The role of artificial intelligence in the creation of literature reviews
2.5.2 Limitations of AI
2.6 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
3 Journalology: the science of publishing
3.1 A description and historical origins of journalology
3.2 The peer review process
3.3 Issues and potential improvements of the peer review process
3.3.1 Making peer review a teamwork effort
3.3.2 Avoiding publication bias and increasing transparency
3.3.3 Improving the accuracy of the peer review process
3.3.4 Reducing the duration of the peer review process
3.3.5 Other suggestions to improve the peer review process
3.4 Preprinted articles
3.5 The creation of predatory publishers and Beall’s list
3.6 Consequences of predatory journals
3.6.1 Corrupting research
3.6.2 Undermining the training of scholars
3.6.3 Increased email correspondence to academics
3.7 Checklists and flow diagrams to identify predatory journals
3.8 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
4 Impact of funding agencies on the production of research
4.1 Improving the grant application process
4.1.1 Implementing a two‑stage application process
4.1.2 Overcoming the ‘incumbency advantage’
4.1.3 Multiple application opportunities to reduce application burden and stress
4.1.4 Improving the quality of feedback that unsuccessful applicants receive
4.2 How funding agencies can improve the quality of research
4.2.1 Improving the evaluation of knowledge translation in research proposals
4.2.2 Addressing sex and gender bias in research
4.2.3 Preventing inappropriate influence by funding agencies
4.2.4 Making research reproducible
4.3 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
5 Improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia
5.1 Academic bullying
5.1.1 Overview of academic bullying
5.1.2 Factors that can cause and exacerbate academic bullying
5.1.3 Strategies to reduce academic bullying
5.2 Racism in research workplaces
5.3 Women in academia
5.3.1 Women’s participation in academia
5.3.2 Factors that inhibit the inclusion and promotion of women in academia
5.3.3 Improving the inclusion, retention, and promotion of women in academia
5.4 General recommendations for improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia
5.4.1 Changes to publishing policies
5.4.2 The role of universities and academic institutions
5.4.3 The role of funding agencies
5.5 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
6 Understanding and addressing questionable research practices
6.1 Defining questionable research practices
6.1.1 Cherry picking
6.1.2 P‑hacking
6.1.3 Hypothesising After Results are Known
6.2 Occurrence of questionable research practices
6.3 Strategies to reduce questionable research practices
6.3.1 Using evidence‑based language
6.3.2 Justifying specific tests for p‑values
6.3.3 Pre‑registering a study’s design
6.3.4 Reforming grant awarding agencies
6.3.5 Educating scholars about questionable research practices
6.3.6 Creating reporting procedures
6.3.7 Reforming the ‘publish or perish’ culture
6.3.8 Removing any financial incentives for academic publishing
6.3.9 Creating an independent research integrity agency
6.3.10 Making researchers pledge an oath to uphold research integrity
6.3.11 Developing a confidential reporting system
6.3.12 Aubert Bonn and colleagues’ suggestions about improving research integrity
6.4 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
7 Addressing the reproducibility crisis
7.1 Defining reproducibility
7.2 Consequences of irreproducible research
7.3 Strategies to increase reproducible research
7.3.1 Publishing datasets
7.3.2 Establishing journals that only publish replication studies
7.3.3 Teaching academic staff about reproducibility
7.3.4 Open Science Badges
7.3.5 Incorporating reproducibility requirements into the criteria for research funding
7.3.6 Reforming academic hiring practices to promote reproducible research
7.3.7 Pre‑registering studies
7.3.8 Improving the readability of a study’s methodology
7.3.9 Improving the clarity of conference presentations
7.3.10 Requiring researchers to self‑examine their previous research
7.4 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
8 Human Research Ethics Committees and Metascience
8.1 The creation of Human Research Ethics Committees
8.2 Operational issues with Human Research Ethics Committees
8.2.1 Providing ethics training to applicants
8.2.2 Educating members of Human Research Ethics Committees to examine ethics applications
8.2.3 Interactive ethics presentations
8.2.4 Retrospective ethics reviews
8.2.5 Participant feedback to ethics committees
8.2.6 Creating consistent policies for Health Research Ethics Committees
8.2.7 Reducing HREC application rejection rates
8.3 Conclusion
Additional readings
References
9 Final remarks
References
Notă biografică
Dr Gabriel Bennett, the pen name for Dr Matthew Bennett, holds a PhD in Disability Studies from Flinders University, Australia. He has lectured in Disability Studies at Griffith University, Queensland. He has also advised the Australian Government’s Autism CRC and has published articles for the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. He is actively involved in supporting autistics to achieve their potential in society by disseminating his knowledge about the autism spectrum via lectures, conference presentations, and publications.
Dr Emma Goodall is an adjunct research fellow at the University of Southern Queensland, Australia, holds a PhD in Education, and is focused on teaching students on the autism spectrum. She is an executive member of the Australian Society for Autism Research, independent researcher through Healthy Possibilities, and a published author and keynote speaker in the areas of autism, sexuality and relationships, education, and interoception.
Dr Emma Goodall is an adjunct research fellow at the University of Southern Queensland, Australia, holds a PhD in Education, and is focused on teaching students on the autism spectrum. She is an executive member of the Australian Society for Autism Research, independent researcher through Healthy Possibilities, and a published author and keynote speaker in the areas of autism, sexuality and relationships, education, and interoception.
Descriere
This book delves into core metascientific concepts, offering a critical examination of current knowledge creation processes and scrutinizing researchers and their methodologies across disciplines.
Designed for scientists and researchers, it caters to those interested in understanding how research evolves over time.
Designed for scientists and researchers, it caters to those interested in understanding how research evolves over time.