Open Science Framework

In an effort to make published science to be less wrong, psychologist Brian Nosek and collaborators have started what is called the Open Science Framework.  The idea is that all results from experiments can be openly documented for everyone to see.  This way, negative results that are locked away in the proverbial “file drawer”,  will be available.  In light of the fact that many high impact results turn out to be wrong (e.g see here and here), we definitely needed to do something and I think this is a good start.  You can hear Nosek talk about this on Econtalk here.

2 thoughts on “Open Science Framework

  1. there is a serious problem with this, familiar to any one who actually does expeirments, at least biology lab experiments: there are many trivial reasons you get a negative results, eg you forgot to add a chemcial to a tube


  2. i saw this in a brief article in nature or science. its a pretty good idea. i and some others are somewhat skeptical of some or many articles in psychology and behavioral economics (overlapping fields of course) because too often they use small samples of often overwhlmingly white upper/middle class white students, and then try to generalize this across cultures to posit ‘universals’ (eg 5 factor model in psychology—mcrae, etc (see wikipedia)). the same issue applies to behavioral genetics (eg infoprocessing blog seems to be really into this, who i note is one of your collaborators.

    (As an aside i see that so is jack cowan who i once saw give a talk on symmetry breaking and hallucinations which was quite interesting (‘goldstone bosons in the brain’) tho he summarily dismissed the approach by umezawa i’d seen in an old JTB—‘thermofield dynamics’—i was intrigued then and even now of possibilities for quantum desrcriptions of daily life—from frolich (bose enstein condensates—cell phones and cancer) to penrose to aerts…)

    in general, one might wonder what kinds of experiments people would do from a history independent ‘godlike’ (or godisheus—dc band of head roc) view, without pathdependent or hysteristic effects of say, being required to find ‘genetic markers’ for some behavior using ‘big data processing’ or using an MRI machine bought by the university. (eg see Jay Joseph’s critiques of equal environment hypothesis of behavioral genetics, which suggests there are ‘many worlds’ in psychology which may or may not coexist in a superposition, or interfere (possibly with funding).
    i wonder why i wonder why.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s