Journal for Reproducibility in Neuroscience

PDF

Keywords

librarian
cultural brokerage
interdisciplinarity
collaboration

How to Cite

Granger, S. (2020). How research reproducibility challenges librarians’ skill sets. A French librarian’s perspective. Journal for Reproducibility in Neuroscience, 2, 1450. https://doi.org/10.31885/jrn.2.2021.1450

Abstract

Reproducible research requires to dive into a wide range of subjects (e.g.: statistics, study design, scientific computing) that are quite far from French librarians practices and/or initial training. Librarians do have a technical expertise, but horror stories pinpoint that even seasoned experts seem to lose track. In such context, what could be the added value of librarians?

https://doi.org/10.31885/jrn.2.2021.1450
PDF

References

Carbone P, Giami A. Le parcours et la carrière des conservateurs de bibliothèques. Paris: Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur, de la Recherche et de l’Innovation; 2017.

Smart AG. The war over supercooled water. Phys Today [Internet]. 2018 Aug 22 [cited 2018 Aug 24]; Available from: https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.1.20180822a/full/

Baker M. 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature. 2016 May 25;533(7604):452–4.

Committee on Reproducibility and Replicability in Science, Committee on National Statistics, Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, et al. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2019 [cited 2019 Sep 3]. Available from: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25303

Randall D, Welser C. The Irreproducibility Crisis of Modern Science. Causes, Consequences, and the Road to Reform [Internet]. New York: National Association of Scholars; 2018. Available from: https://www.nas.org/reports/the-irreproducibility-crisi s-of-modern-science

Benureau F, Rougier N. Re-run, Repeat, Reproduce, Reuse, Replicate: Transforming Code into Scientific Contributions. ArXiv170808205 Cs [Internet]. 2017 Aug 28 [cited 2017 Sep 25]; Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1708.08205

Bearman M, Smith CD, Carbone A, Slade S, Baik C, Hughes-Warrington M, et al. Systematic review methodology in higher education. High Educ Res Dev. 2012 Oct;31(5):625–40.

Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page M, et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [Internet]. 2 nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2019. Available from: http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1198759353

Fanelli D. “Positive” Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences. Scalas E, editor. PLoS ONE. 2010 Apr 7;5(4):e10068.

Nieuwland M. Nature says it wants to publish replication attempts. So what happened when a group of authors submitted one to Nature Neuroscience? Part 1 [ Internet]. Retraction Watch. 2018 [cited 2018 May 31]. Available from: https://retractionwatch.com/2018/05/08/nature-says-it-wants-to-publish-replication-attempts-so-what-happened-when-a-group-of-authors-submitted-one-to-natur e-neuroscience/

Nieuwland M. An attempt to publish a replication attempt in a Nature journal, part 2 [Internet]. Retraction Watch. 2018 [ cited 2018 May 31]. Available from: https://retractionwatch.com/2018/05/09/an-attempt-to -publish-a-replication-attempt-in-a-nature-journal-part-2/

Nieuwland M. One team’s struggle to publish a replication attempt, part 3 [ Internet]. Retraction Watch. 2018 [cited 2018 May 31]. Available from: https://retractionwatch.com/2018/05/10/one-teams-struggle-to-publish-a-replication-attempt-part-3/

Nosek BA, Beck ED, Campbell L, Flake JK, Hardwicke TE, Mellor DT, et al. Preregistration Is Hard, And Worthwhile. Trends Cogn Sci. 2019 Aug;S1364661319301846.

Munafò MR, Nosek BA, Bishop DVM, Button KS, Chambers CD, Sert NP du, et al. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Jan 10;1(1):0021.

Frankenhuis W, Nettle D. Open Science is Liberating and Can Foster Creativity. Open Sci Framew [Internet]. 2018 Feb 18 [cited 2018 May 31]; Available from: https://osf.io/edhym/

Lindsay DS, Simons DJ, Lilienfeld SO. Research Preregistration 101. APS Obs [Internet]. 2016 Nov 30 [cited 2018 Jan 12];29(10). Available from: https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/resear ch-preregistration-101

Devezer B, Navarro DJ, Vandekerckhove J, Buzbas EO. The case for formal methodology in scientific reform. bioRxiv. 2020 Apr 28;2020.04.26.048306.

Lilienfeld SO, Waldman ID, editors. Maximizing the Reproducibility of Your Research. Psychol Sci Scrut Recent Chall Propos Solut [ Internet]. 2014 Feb 26 [cited 2018 Jun 8]; Available from: https://osf.io/xidvw/

Wessel I. Reflections of an open science convert 1: Why I changed my research practices [Internet]. Mindwise. 2019 [cited 2020 May 4]. Available from: https://mindwise-groningen.nl/reflections-of-an-open- science-convert-1/

Leek J. On the scalability of statistical procedures: why the p-value bashers just don’t get it. · Simply Statistics [Internet]. Simply Statistics. 2014 [cited May 28]. Available from: https://simplystatistics.org/2014/02/14/on-the-scalability-of-statistical-procedures-why-the-p-value-bashers- just-dont-get-it/

Wilcox RR, Rousselet GA. A Guide to Robust Statistical Methods in Neuroscience. Curr Protoc Neurosci. 2018 Jan 22;82:8.42.1-8.42.30.

Plesser HE. Reproducibility vs. Replicability: A Brief History of a Confused Terminology. Front Neuroinformatics [Internet]. 2018 [ cited 2018 Feb 16];11. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fninf.2017.00076/full

Bammer G. Should we discipline interdisciplinarity? Palgrave Commun. 2017 Nov 14;3(1):1–4.

Brown RR, Deletic A, Wong THF. Interdisciplinarity: How to catalyse collaboration. Nat News. 2015 Sep 17;525(7569):315.

Jang S. Cultural Brokerage and Creative Performance in Multicultural Teams. Organ Sci. 2017 Dec 1;28(6):993–1009.

Yarborough M, Nadon R, Karlin DG. Four erroneous beliefs thwarting more trustworthy research. Rodgers P, Pewsey E, MacLeod MR, Michel M, Amaral OB, editors. eLife. 2019 Jul 29;8:e45261.

Leonelli S. Re-Thinking Reproducibility as a Criterion for Research Quality. Hist Econ Thought Methodol. 2018 Jan;19.

Deardorff A. Assessing the impact of introductory programming workshops on the computational reproducibility of biomedical workflows. bioRxiv. 2020 Mar 9;2020.03.09.983429.

Barba LA. Terminologies for Reproducible Research. ArXiv180203311 Cs [Internet]. 2018 Feb 9 [cited Feb 16]; Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03311

Jang S. Bringing Worlds Together: Cultural Brokerage in Multicultural Teams [Internet]. Harvard University; 2014 [cited 2020 Oct 27]. Available from: https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/12274592

Kvenild C, Calkins K. Embedded librarians: moving beyond one-shot instruction. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries; 2011.

Orben A, Parsons S, Crüwell S. ReproducibiliTea Starter Pack. 2019 Feb 7 [cited 2019 Feb 12]; Available from: https://osf.io/3ed8x/

Whitaker K. 10 simple rules to run an open and inclusive project online [Internet]. 2019 Sep 1 [cited 2019 Sep 2]. Available from: https://zenodo.org/record/3383063#.XWzHeoppEfQ

Hettne KM, Proppert R, Nab L, Saunero LPR, Gawehns D. ReprohackNL 2019: How libraries can promote research reproducibility through community engagement [Internet]. SocArXiv; 2020 Apr [cited 2020 Apr 30]. Available from: https://osf.io/6f4zv

Boettiger C, Hao Y, Lowndes JSS, Frazier MR. Code Review in the Lab, or ... How do you review code that accompanies a research project or paper? - rOpenSci - open tools for open science [Internet]. ROpenSci. 2018 [cited 2020 Apr 8]. Available from: https://ropensci.org/commcalls/2018-10-16/

Lowndes JSS, Best BD, Scarborough C, Afflerbach JC, Frazier MR, O’Hara CC, et al. Our path to better science in less time using open data science tools. Nat Ecol Evol. 2017 Jun;1(6):0160.

Lowndes JSS. R for better science in less time [Internet]. UseR 2019; 2019 Jul 10 [cited 2019 Jul 10]; Toulouse. Available from: https://jules32.github.io/useR-2019-keynote/#1

Baker R, Berry D, Brokering M, Dieter M, French A, Rühling B. On Book Sprints [Internet]. Berlin: Booksprints.net; 2014. Available from: https://www.booksprints.net/en/blog/book-sprint-on-book-sprints/

Pope C. The Great Sussex Book Sprint [Internet]. Dr Catherine Pope. 2017 [cited 2018 Jul 12]. Available from: https://catherinepope.com/great-sussex-book-sprint/

Baker R. Book Sprints for ICT Research - Testing the practice of Book Sprints as a new paradigm of collaborative writing for ICT researchers and innovators (project evaluative research report) [Internet]. Floss Manuals Foundation; 2014 [cited Jun 18]. Available from: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/323988

Heller L, Brinken H. How to run a book sprint – in 16 steps [Internet]. Impact of Social Sciences. 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 12]. Available from: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/11/20/how-to-run-a-book-sprint-in-16-steps/

TIB. FOSTER Book Sprint at TIB [Internet]. [cited Jun 18]. Available from: https://www.tib.eu/en/service/events/details/foster-bo ok-sprint-at-tib/

Desquilbet L, Granger S, Hejblum B, Legrand A, Pernot P, Rougier NP. Vers une recherche reproductible [Internet]. ebook. Bordeaux: Urfist de Bordeaux; 2019 [cited 2019 May 6]. Available from: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02144142

Becher T, Trowler PR. Academic tribes and territories: intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Buckingham, Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d’Irlande du Nord: Open university press, 2001; 2001. xv+238.

Varoquaux G. Technical discussions are hard; a few tips [Internet]. Gael-Varoquaux.info. 2020 [cited 2020 May 28]. Available from: http://gael-varoquaux.info/programming/technical-dis cussions-are-hard-a-few-tips.html

Herterich P, Solymosi R, Perez-Suarez D, Brown L, Frawley J. Are you promoting good practices for open research? [Internet]. Software Sustainability Institute. 2020 [cited 2020 May 20]. Available from: https://software.ac.uk/blog/2020-05-20-cw20-speed-b log-are-you-promoting-good-practices-open-research

Bishop DVM. Fallibility in Science: Responding to Errors in the Work of Oneself and Others: Adv Methods Pract Psychol Sci [Internet]. 2018 Jul 3 [cited 2018 Jul 4]; Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2515245 918776632?journalCode=ampa#articleShareContainer

Parker H. Opinionated analysis development. PeerJ Prepr [Internet]. 2017 Aug 31 [cited 2018 Feb 16]; Available from: https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3210v1

Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike License Logo

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International License.