Meta-science, social inequality, methods, open science.
At inception this blog catalogs the wracking process of organizing, administering and evaluating the project and its massive amount of generated data in the Crowdsourced Replication Initiative (CRI).
A technical blog, looking at the ‘nitty-gritty’ of the methods necessary to carry out and present the findings of a project involving 88 research teams, almost 200 researchers, an online deliberation, four survey waves during the process, an experimental condition, a replication, an original research condition, and analysis and meta-analysis of the results.
A research question blog, asking bigger questions about meta-science, researcher reliability, reproducibility, social inequality and crowdsourcing.
In the future…. this blog will address more.
Why blog? The future of science may involve a more interactive, hyperlinked and faster disseminated format. Blogs can facilitate this. In the social science the turnaround time from research findings to published papers is somewhere around 3 to 4 years (counting rejections and R&R’s). Moreover, blogs offer space for discussing things that simply don’t fit in our awfully restrictive 6-12,000 word journal articles.
Open science calls for blogging. Its free, fast and owes no debts. It circumvents the institutional problems of science. As an Open Science Fellow as part of the Freies Wissen program of Wikimedia Germany, a Catalyst for the Berkeley Initiative for Transparency in the Social Sciences (BITSS) and a concerned sociologist, this blog is a contribution to the open science movement.
OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Nate Breznau (October 23, 2019). It’s Crowdid. Crowdid. Retrieved November 14, 2024 from https://doi.org/10.58079/ne81
Hi, this is a comment.
To get started with moderating, editing, and deleting comments, please visit the Comments screen in the dashboard.
Commenter avatars come from Gravatar.