Week 1: Tuesday, January 14, 2020
Topics
- Introduction to the course
- Needs/interests assessment, and goal setting
- Discussion: Why trust science?
- Setting up computational environments
- On your local machine
- In the cloud
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-01-21.
- In a paragraph or two, discuss whether you think researchers in your
field do and should embrace “Mertonian norms.” Why or
why not?
- In a paragraph or two, describe your current knowledge of computer
programming languages, and at least three learning goals you have for
building upon that base.
- Create a GitHub account, send me your account name in an email, and
see if you can create your own copy (fork or clone) of the course
repository. If you succeed, take a screen shot of the repository in your
local GitHub account.
- Write these items up in a Word (.docx) file, and email it to me.
Make sure to use a sensible file name, e.g.,
psy525-YOUR_LAST_NAME-2020-01-21.docx
.
Week 2: Tuesday, January 21, 2020
Topics
- The values of science
- Cases of scientific misconduct
- What is reproducibility? Are we in a crisis?
Readings/webinars
- The values of science (read 1; skim the others)
- Nosek, B. A., & Bar-Anan, Y. (2012). Scientific utopia I:
Opening scientific communication. Psychological Inquiry,
23(3), 217–243. Retrieved May 9, 2015, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2012.692215
- Kim, S. Y., & Kim, Y. (2018). The ethos of science and its
correlates: An empirical analysis of scientists’ endorsement of
Mertonian norms. Science, Technology and Society, 23(1), 1–24.
SAGE Publications India. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0971721817744438
- Brakewood, B., & Poldrack, R. A. (2013). The ethics of secondary
data analysis: Considering the application of Belmont principles to the
sharing of neuroimaging data. NeuroImage, 82, 671–676.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.040
- Cases of scientific misconduct (read 1; skim the other)
- Reproducibility (skim)
- Supplemental (not required)
- Heesen, R., & Bright, L. K. (2019). Is peer review a good idea?
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 40.
eprints.lse.ac.uk. Retrieved January 7, 2020, from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/101242/
- Goodman, S. N., Fanelli, D., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2016). What
does research reproducibility mean? Science Translational
Medicine, 8(341), 341ps12–341ps12. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027
- http://www.stats.org/what-do-we-mean-by-reproducibility/
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-01-28.
- Choose one of the verification bias examples from Flawed
Science. In a paragraph or two, propose ways you might avoid
this sort of bias in your own research.
- Choose one of the TOP guideline
categories where either your own research practices have room to
improve or you are doing rather well. In a paragraph or two, explain
your reasoning.
Week 3: Tuesday, January 28, 2020
Readings/webinars
- Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V. M., Button, K. S.,
Chambers, C. D., Sert, N. P. du, … Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017). A
manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1, 0021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021.
(Required)
- Reproducible workflows (Optional)
- Tidy data (Optional)
- File naming (Optional)
- Spreadsheets (Optional)
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-01-28.
Pick one of the recommended elements from Table 1
in Munafò, et al. (2017). Evaluate the recommendation. Do you agree
that it would mitigate one or more threats to reproducibility. Why or
why not? Do you agree with the assessment about the degree to which
stakeholders have adopted the recommended practice?. We covered
most of this material in class.
- Edit/create a text-based workflow for an active project you are
working on.
- Annote the workflow to indicate where it could be made more
reproducible, transparent.
- If you are feeling super-ambitious, you may want to try creating a
graph-based workflow using the
diagrammeR
package.
Week 4: Tuesday, February 4, 2020
Topics
- Pregistration and registered reports
- Introduction to RStudio and R Markdown
Readings/webinars
- Pre-registration and registered reports
- Chambers, C., Munafò, M., & signatories, more than 80. (2013,
June 5). Trust in science would be improved by study pre-registration.
The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2013/jun/05/trust-in-science-study-pre-registration
- Registered Reports. (n.d.). Retrieved January 24, 2017, from https://cos.io/rr/?_ga=1.163722943.1251838540.1458403228
- Mathot, S. (2013, March 26). The pros and cons of pre-registration
in fundamental research. Retrieved January 24, 2017 from http://www.cogsci.nl/blog/miscellaneous/215-the-pros-and-cons-of-pre-registration-in-fundamental-research
- (Optional) Frank, M. (2016, July 22). Preregister everything. http://babieslearninglanguage.blogspot.com/2016/07/preregister-everything.html
- (Optional) Claesen, A., Gomes, S. L. B. T., Tuerlinckx, F., &
Vanpaemel, W. (2019, May). Preregistration: Comparing Dream to Reality.
Retrieved from psyarxiv.com/d8wex.
- R Markdown exercise
- Optional
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-02-11.
- Find a preregistration document for a study relevant to your
research interests on
aspredicted.org
or
osf.io
. In a few paragraphs, comment on what was and what
was not included. Would the preregistration provide researchers
sufficient structure to carry out the research without ‘HARKing’? What
downsides do you see to preregistration?
- Create a template for a reproducible research report or a
pregistration document in R Markdown.
- Convert some portion of your workflow from last week’s assignment
into an R Markdown.
- Make sure to use some R Markdown features you haven’t used before.
Flag the features you used and explain how they’d be useful in an actual
use case you can envision.
- Either email me the R Markdown file, or if you’ve pushed your file
to a GitHub repo, send me a review request.
Week 5: Tuesday, February 11, 2020
Readings/webinars
- Hardwicke, T. E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2018). Mapping the
universe of registered reports. Nature Human Behaviour,
2(11), 793–796. nature.com. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0444-y
- Claesen, A., Gomes, S. L. B. T., Tuerlinckx, F., & Vanpaemel, W.
(2019, May). Preregistration: Comparing dream to reality. Retrieved from
https://psyarxiv.com/d8wex.
- GitHub
and RStudio
- Jenny Bryan’s http://happygitwithr.com/
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-02-18.
- Create GitHub repo for the project you completed last week
- Open an issue flagging
@rogilmore
so I know to look at
your repo and document.
- Create a repo for your final course project
- Create an R Markdown document where you start to outline the
possible directions that your final project might take.
- Open an issue so I can take a look.
- Clone a repo; fix/change something; make a pull
request.
Week 6: Tuesday, February 18, 2020
Topics
- Simulation as a tool for reproducible and transparent science
- Visualization tools in R
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-02-25.
- Create your own simulated data set for a real or proposed study.
- You may adapt or build upon the examples used in class.
- Put the results in an R Markdown (.Rmd) file.
- Commit the .Rmd file to your private repo on GitHub and either raise
an Issue on GitHub or submit a pull request.
- Plot the results of your simulation using ggplot2 commands.
- Make sure that your simulation has the following sub-sections:
- Introduction/Motivation
- What are you simulating and why? Where do the parameter estimates
come from? The literature or your best guess?
- Plots
- Statistical Analyses
- Discussion/Conclusions
- What did you discover or demonstrate?
- Please label the R chunks in your R Markdown files
Week 7: Tuesday, February 25, 2020
Topics
- Doing other useful things with R and R Markdown
Readings/webinars
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-03-03.
- Create a set of HTML talk slides using R Markdown.
- Try rendering the slides as a Word document, PowerPoint document, or
PDF.
- Create a new repo and generate a simple website using R
Markdown.
Week 8: Tuesday, March 3, 2020
Readings/webinars (recommended)
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-03-17.
- Complete a 1-2 page write-up describing your plans for your final
project.
Spring Break March 9 - 12, 2020
NO CLASS
Week 9: Tuesday, March 17, 2020
Week 10: Tuesday, March 24, 2020
Topics
- Tools for reproducible data-gathering
Readings/webinars
- de Leeuw, J.R. (2015). jsPsych: A JavaScript library for creating
behavioral experiments in a Web browser. Behavior Research
Methods, 47(1), 1-12. doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-03-31.
If you are new to PsychoPy:
Open a PsychoPy demo program and save it with a new name. Add
additional documentation to the demo program that explains what’s
happening. Change one or more parameters to make the program do
something slightly different, and explain what parameters you changed.
Push your code to a repo and tag rogilmore
.
If you are an experienced PsychoPy user:
Share a PsychoPy application you have helped to develop. Add
additional documentation to the demo program that explains what’s
happening. Modify the program as needed so that another user could run
it by cloning your program. Push your code to a repo and tag
rogilmore
.
Week 11: Tuesday, March 31, 2020
Topics
- Using APIs
- U.S. Census
- Google Drive
- Box
- Wikidata
- Databrary
- OSF
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-04-07.
Create a Jupyter notebook (or R Markdown report) where you document
your exploration of the Qualtrics, Box, or Google Drive APIs. Describe a
use case for one of these tools in your research workflow, and test a
preliminary implementation.
Week 12: Tuesday, April 7, 2020
Topics
- Where to share?
- Publishing data
- Challenges to sharing
- Your open science portfolio
- Funder policies
Readings/webinars
- Meyer, M. N. (2018). Practical tips for ethical data sharing.
Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science,
2515245917747656. SAGE Publications Inc. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245917747656
- Gilmore, R.O., Cole, P.M., van Aken, M.A.G., Verma S., &
Worthman, C.M. (2020). Advancing scientific integrity, transparency, and
openness in child development research: Challenges and possible
solutions. Child Development Perspectives, 14(1),
9-14. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12360
Homework
Due by the start of class on 2020-04-14.
Choose two outlets for sharing research data or materials and compare
and contrast their strengths and weaknesses.
Week 13: Tuesday, April 14, 2020
Week 14: Tuesday, April 21, 2020
Topics
- Preparation for student projects
Week 15: Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Topics
- Student project presentations
CC0 1.0 Universal License