{"title":"开放科学改革:优势、挑战与未来方向","authors":"K. Wentzel","doi":"10.1080/00461520.2021.1901709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, I comment on the potential benefits and limitations of open science reforms for improving the transparency and accountability of research, and enhancing the credibility of research findings within communities of policy and practice. Specifically, I discuss the role of replication and reproducibility of research in promoting better quality studies, the identification of generalizable principles, and relevance for practitioners and policymakers. Second, I suggest that greater attention to theory might contribute to the impact of open science practices, and discuss ways in which theory has implications for sampling, measurement, and research design. Ambiguities concerning the aims of preregistration and registered reports also are highlighted. In conclusion, I discuss structural roadblocks to open science reform and reflect on the relevance of these reforms for educational psychology.","PeriodicalId":48361,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":14.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Open science reforms: Strengths, challenges, and future directions\",\"authors\":\"K. Wentzel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00461520.2021.1901709\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this article, I comment on the potential benefits and limitations of open science reforms for improving the transparency and accountability of research, and enhancing the credibility of research findings within communities of policy and practice. Specifically, I discuss the role of replication and reproducibility of research in promoting better quality studies, the identification of generalizable principles, and relevance for practitioners and policymakers. Second, I suggest that greater attention to theory might contribute to the impact of open science practices, and discuss ways in which theory has implications for sampling, measurement, and research design. Ambiguities concerning the aims of preregistration and registered reports also are highlighted. In conclusion, I discuss structural roadblocks to open science reform and reflect on the relevance of these reforms for educational psychology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Psychologist\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":14.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Psychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1901709\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1901709","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Open science reforms: Strengths, challenges, and future directions
Abstract In this article, I comment on the potential benefits and limitations of open science reforms for improving the transparency and accountability of research, and enhancing the credibility of research findings within communities of policy and practice. Specifically, I discuss the role of replication and reproducibility of research in promoting better quality studies, the identification of generalizable principles, and relevance for practitioners and policymakers. Second, I suggest that greater attention to theory might contribute to the impact of open science practices, and discuss ways in which theory has implications for sampling, measurement, and research design. Ambiguities concerning the aims of preregistration and registered reports also are highlighted. In conclusion, I discuss structural roadblocks to open science reform and reflect on the relevance of these reforms for educational psychology.
期刊介绍:
The Educational Psychologist is a scholarly journal dedicated to exploring the psychology of learning and instruction. Articles in this journal encompass a diverse range of perspectives, from examining psychological mechanisms to exploring social and societal phenomena related to learning and instruction. The journal publishes theoretical and conceptual articles, as well as reviews and meta-analyses, that significantly contribute to theory or advance the methods used to explore educational psychology. Emphasizing innovation and advancing understanding, the journal does not publish articles solely reporting the methods and results of empirical studies; instead, all submissions, including reviews and meta-analyses, must offer clear implications for advancing theory. In addition to regular articles, the journal features special issues that delve into important themes in educational psychology, along with focal articles accompanied by peer commentary.