I mentioned to @pcmasuzzo yesterday the idea of launching an IGDORE open seminar series occurring online on a bi-weekly or monthly basis. Speakers would come from within and outside of IGDORE and talks would be relevant to open and replicable science. The seminars would be open to the public.
Each session would begin with a 10-15 minutes general Q&A on open and replicable science. Here any attendee may ask questions they’re looking for answers to, such as how to solve a statistical issue they’re struggling with, how to preregister their research, how to convince co-authors to publish open access, or any other question they currently may be struggling with. The speaker would be present to answer such questions but the questions could just as well be answered by other attendees.
I was thinking about talks being categorised into one of five recurring themes:
Whistleblowers. Speakers who blew the whistle, or perhaps decided not to, and speakers who may have conducted research on whistleblowing.
Methodological terrorists. Speakers who by some might be considered ‘data police’ or ‘methodological terrorists’, the latter a term coined by Dr. Susan Fiske, Professor in Psychology. That is, speakers who investigate the quality of other researchers’ work. This type of talk focuses on the investigative process, related ethics, funding, conflicts, etc; pure methodological topics are instead discussed under the category ‘Hardcore methods’.
Revelations. Speakers talk about their own mistakes in science, how they themselves were engaged in questionable research practices or other types of morally questionable research. The talks have a particular focus on how the speaker came to realise that what they were doing was wrong or how they came to the decision to change their practices.
Future of science. Speakers discuss ideas and concepts they believe to be the future of science. The talks can be highly visionary or bring up phenomena that have already been launched but still are new to many empirical researchers.
Hardcore methods. Here we discuss research methods and statistics. The speaker might launch a new idea or provide a walk through of an already established concept, method, analysis, or tool.
Would love to hear people’s thoughts on this. Maybe you have suggestions on speakers you’d like to hear? Or maybe you have thoughts on additional or other categories or maybe you’d prefer to rename them?
Ping e.g. @global_board.