Gambling researchers’ use and views of open science principles and practices: a brief report

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE International Gambling Studies Pub Date : 2021-03-31 DOI:10.1080/14459795.2021.1891272
Debi A. LaPlante, Eric R. Louderback, Brett Abarbanel
{"title":"Gambling researchers’ use and views of open science principles and practices: a brief report","authors":"Debi A. LaPlante, Eric R. Louderback, Brett Abarbanel","doi":"10.1080/14459795.2021.1891272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Scientists across disciplines have begun to implement ‘open science’ principles and practices, which are designed to enhance the quality, transparency, and replicability of scientific research. Yet, studies examining the use of open science practices in social science fields such as psychology and economics show that awareness and use of such practices often is low. In gambling studies research, no studies to date have empirically investigated knowledge of and use of open science practices. In the present study, we collected survey data about awareness and use of open science practices from 86 gambling studies research stakeholders who had attended a major international gambling studies conference in May 2019. We found that – as hypothesized – a minority of gambling research stakeholders reported: 1) either some or extensive experience using open science research practices in general, and 2) either some or regular experience using specific open science practices, including study pre-registration, open materials/code, open data, and pre-print archiving. Most respondents indicated that replication was important for all studies in gambling research, and that genetic, neuroscience, and lab-based game characteristic studies were areas most in need of replication. Our results have important implications for open science education initiatives and for contemporary research methodology in gambling studies.","PeriodicalId":47301,"journal":{"name":"International Gambling Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14459795.2021.1891272","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Gambling Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2021.1891272","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

ABSTRACT Scientists across disciplines have begun to implement ‘open science’ principles and practices, which are designed to enhance the quality, transparency, and replicability of scientific research. Yet, studies examining the use of open science practices in social science fields such as psychology and economics show that awareness and use of such practices often is low. In gambling studies research, no studies to date have empirically investigated knowledge of and use of open science practices. In the present study, we collected survey data about awareness and use of open science practices from 86 gambling studies research stakeholders who had attended a major international gambling studies conference in May 2019. We found that – as hypothesized – a minority of gambling research stakeholders reported: 1) either some or extensive experience using open science research practices in general, and 2) either some or regular experience using specific open science practices, including study pre-registration, open materials/code, open data, and pre-print archiving. Most respondents indicated that replication was important for all studies in gambling research, and that genetic, neuroscience, and lab-based game characteristic studies were areas most in need of replication. Our results have important implications for open science education initiatives and for contemporary research methodology in gambling studies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
赌博研究人员对开放科学原则和实践的使用和看法:一份简短的报告
跨学科的科学家已经开始实施“开放科学”原则和实践,旨在提高科学研究的质量、透明度和可复制性。然而,研究开放科学实践在心理学和经济学等社会科学领域的使用情况表明,人们对这种实践的认识和使用程度往往很低。在赌博研究中,迄今为止没有任何研究对开放科学实践的知识和使用进行实证调查。在本研究中,我们收集了86名参与2019年5月大型国际赌博研究会议的赌博研究利益相关者关于开放科学实践意识和使用的调查数据。我们发现,正如假设的那样,少数博彩研究利益相关者报告:1)总体上有一些或广泛的开放科学研究实践经验,2)有一些或经常的特定开放科学实践经验,包括研究预注册、开放材料/代码、开放数据和预打印存档。大多数受访者表示,复制对赌博研究的所有研究都很重要,基因、神经科学和基于实验室的游戏特征研究是最需要复制的领域。我们的研究结果对开放科学教育倡议和当代赌博研究方法具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.60%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Illegal video game loot boxes with transferable content on steam: a longitudinal study on their presence and non-compliance with and non-enforcement of gambling law Awareness and impact of casino responsible gambling/harm minimization measures among Canadian electronic gaming machine players Perceptions of gambling marketing among young adults who gamble in Ireland Between anti-gambling and masculinity: mahjong playing among Japanese gay men Balancing conflicting interests: stakeholders’ interpretations of ‘moderation’ in Swedish gambling advertising legislation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1