LanguageTerm (authority = ISO 639-3:2007); (type = text)
English
Abstract (type = abstract)
Background:
Interacting with the published literature (“knowledge consumption”) and publishing new scientific findings (“knowledge production”) are two key moments in the scientist’s search for truth, and bias in either of these can distort what is known about an area of research. This dissertation details three studies conducted on researchers in psychology that together provide evidence of scientists’ behaviors influencing these key moments of knowledge production and knowledge consumption.
Methods:
Psychologists were recruited to participate in each study (N = 215 and N = 587). Studies used custom web tools and social network methods to collect unique datasets on psychologists’ social networks and how they approach the scientific literature. The analytic approach differed based on each study. For studies on knowledge consumption, Gini coefficients and measures of unpredictability were calculated to better understand the dynamics of the published literature. For studies on knowledge production, the generalized network scale up method was used to estimate the size of the population of current users of questionable research practices, and regression was used to better understand the relationship between attitudes and stigma against certain psychologists.
Results:
The presence of download counts (an operationalization of influential metadata) with scientific literature resulted in larger inequality of downloads, meaning potential readers were more likely to download articles that had been previously downloaded by others. Download count presence also resulted in a higher unpredictability of success. The proportion of psychologists who currently use questionable research practices was estimated as 18.18% by direct estimate and 24.4% by the social network scale up estimate. Finally, these researchers were found to be a stigmatized sub-population of psychologists, which could either help or hinder efforts to reduce this population size.
Conclusions:
There is evidence that psychologists may inadvertently bias the knowledge they generate and consume in several different ways. While this dissertation focused specifically on psychologists, there is potential for this work to be applied in other areas of scientific inquiry. These findings highlight the importance of understanding the scientist as a means of better understanding the science.
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
Metascience
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Psychology
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_9715
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
1 online resource (xi, 144 pages) : illustrations
Note (type = degree)
Ph.D.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Subject (authority = LCSH)
Topic
Science -- Research
Subject (authority = LCSH)
Topic
Psychology -- Research
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
School of Graduate Studies Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore10001600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.