1,721,000 research outputs found
Open for Insight
No full textThis is an online course in experimentation as a method of the empirical social sciences, directed at science newcomers and undergrads. We cover topics such as: How do we know what’s true? How can one recognize false conclusions? What is an experiment? What are experiments good for, and what can we learn from them? What makes a good experiment and how can I make a good experiment? The aim of the course is to illustrate the principles of experimental insight. We also discuss why experiments are the gold standard in empirical social sciences and how a basic understanding of experimentation can also help us deal with questions in everyday life. But it is not only exciting research questions and clever experimental set-ups that are needed for experiments to really work well. Experiments and the knowledge gained from them should be as freely accessible and transparent as possible, regardless of the context. Only then can other thinkers and experimenters check whether the results can be reproduced. And only then can other thinkers and experimenters build their own experiments on reliable original work. This is why the online course Open for Insight also discusses how experiments and the findings derived can be developed and communicated openly and transparently.Support for this course was provided by Wikimedia Germany, Stifterverband für die deutsche Wissenschaft, and Tilburg University.Chapter 1: Introduction;
Chapter 2: What is true?;
Chapter 3: How to make good experiments?;
Chapter 4: Shaky insight?;
Chapter 5: Summaryhttp://doi.org/10.26116/lis-oer-rimarahal-2020https://rimamrahal.wordpress.com/open-for-insight
Thermal imaging data capturing fingertip temperatures during observations of lies vs. true stories
No full textPeople tend to be bad at explicitly detecting lies. However, indirect veracity judgments and physiological responses may yield above-chance levels of accuracy in differentiating lies from the truth. If lies induce a threat response, vasoconstriction should reduce peripheral cutaneous blood flow, leading to finger temperature drops when confronted with a lie compared to the truth. Participants (N = 95) observed people telling lies or the truth about their social relationships, during which participants’ fingertip temperature was recorded via infrared thermal imaging. Results suggested that the accuracy of explicit veracity categorizations remained at chance levels. Judgments of story-tellers’ likability and trustworthiness as indirect veracity measures, as well as observers’ fingertip temperatures as a physiological veracity measure significantly differed between lies and true stories. However, the effects pointed in the opposite direction of our expectations: participants liked liars better than truth-tellers and trusted liars more; and fingertip temperatures increased while confronted with lies compared to true stories. We discuss that studying observers’ physiological responses may be a useful window to lie detection, but requires future investigation
Thermal imaging data capturing fingertip temperatures during observations of lies vs. true stories
No full textPeople tend to be bad at explicitly detecting lies. However, indirect veracity judgments and physiological responses may yield above-chance levels of accuracy in differentiating lies from the truth. If lies induce a threat response, vasoconstriction should reduce peripheral cutaneous blood flow, leading to finger temperature drops when confronted with a lie compared to the truth. Participants (N = 95) observed people telling lies or the truth about their social relationships, during which participants’ fingertip temperature was recorded via infrared thermal imaging. Results suggested that the accuracy of explicit veracity categorizations remained at chance levels. Judgments of story-tellers’ likability and trustworthiness as indirect veracity measures, as well as observers’ fingertip temperatures as a physiological veracity measure significantly differed between lies and true stories. However, the effects pointed in the opposite direction of our expectations: participants liked liars better than truth-tellers and trusted liars more; and fingertip temperatures increased while confronted with lies compared to true stories. We discuss that studying observers’ physiological responses may be a useful window to lie detection, but requires future investigation
Wissenschaft in der Krise: Ist Open Science der Ausweg?
No full textSince Open Science has become a recurring buzzword for recent meta-scientific developments, this article summarizes what these developments entail. What are the reasons for discussions about Open Access, Open Data and Open Peer Review? Which technological changes can we expect and which impact will they have on society and the research community
What the judge argues is not what the judge thinks:Eye tracking evidence about the normative weight of conflicting concerns in a Torts case
Full text linkJudicial decision making is not a mechanical activity. It requires a voluntary act. In the abstract, the judge must strike a balance between incompatible normative goals, like backward looking compensation and forward looking deterrence. In the concrete, the decision-maker must weigh conflicting facets of the conflict of life. As a rule, judicial decisions come with explicit reasons. These reasons rationalize the decision. In this paper, we use eye tracking as a window into the – consciously not fully accessible – process of making the decision, testing laypersons on a run-of-the-mill torts case. We manipulate the degree of normative conflict, and either have participants decide as judges, or plead as attorneys. Against expectations, attention is not chiefly directed towards items that support the final outcome. Rather outcome is predicted by attention on potentially conflicting items. Explicit reasons and fixations on items are essentially uncorrelated. Decision-makers are not aware of the elements of the evidence that have been critical for their decision
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Good research needs good working conditions - Research Quality
No full textEngaging the audience by telling a story in five minutes on 20 slides - that is the concept of Ignite Talks.
Look forward to exciting Open Science horror and success stories about working conditions and mismanaged incentives for scientists, about a platform for collaborative writing and open peer review, about the use of established platforms that led to the rapid development of FAIR infrastructures and data provision, about a hospital drama that became a success story through international collaboration and more
Open Education Mirrors the Open Science Reform Movement
Full text linkOpen Educational Resources (OERs) are a game-changer for education, for a plethora of reasons spanning aspects such as accessibility and dissemination. Here, I want to focus on the promise of OERs to facilitate updating educational materials
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
- …
