Code for: Open Science and public trust in science: Results from two studies. Public Understanding of Science
Author(s) / Creator(s)
Rosman, Tom
Bosnjak, Michael
Silber, Henning
Koßmann, Joanna
Heycke, Tobias
Abstract / Description
Abstract of the original article, published in Public Understanding of Science:
In two studies, we examined whether open science practices, such as making the materials, data, and code of a study openly accessible, positively affect public trust in science. Furthermore, we investigated whether the potential trust-damaging effects of research being funded privately (e.g., by a commercial enterprise) may be buffered by such practices. After preregistering six hypotheses, we conducted a survey study (Study 1; N = 504) and an experimental study (Study 2; N = 588) in two German general population samples. In both studies, we found evidence for the positive effects of open science practices on trust, though it should be noted that in Study 2, results were more inconsistent. We however did not find evidence for the aforementioned buffering effect. We conclude that while open science practices may contribute to increasing trust in science, the importance of making the use of open science practices visible should not be underestimated.
Code for: Rosman, T., Bosnjak, M., Silber, H., Koßmann, J., & Heycke, T. (2022). Open science and public trust in science: Results from two studies. Public Understanding of Science, 31(8), 1046–1062. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221100686
Keyword(s)
epistemic trust experimental study open science practices science communication survey study trust in sciencePersistent Identifier
Date of first publication
2022-04-26
Publisher
PsychArchives
Is referenced by
Citation
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_1_code.spsSPSS syntax file - 4.13KBMD5: f49c520309db1b1f03d71389f3527db1
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_1_code.txtText - 4.13KBMD5: 7c27f02e2966697e6830bbebc9f4ab25
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_1_results_output.htmlHTML - 1.53MBMD5: b5ae35a1d201e9913fc9630143f33aa3
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_1_results_output.pdfAdobe PDF - 1.5MBMD5: 2d428910125a148c26a83cf147cd6abc
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_2_code.spsSPSS syntax file - 10.98KBMD5: f83e8c28cc94af7d261bbfcfdd2da7d9
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_2_code.txtText - 9.67KBMD5: e1623c43b20b97809b04d08dc8fbab26
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_2_results_output.htmlHTML - 3.34MBMD5: ae39831059ce82c9c7cc6b88fb44df35
-
Rosman_et_al_2022_Study_2_results_output.pdfAdobe PDF - 4.03MBMD5: 44429e7e63d8248731c539db5ac1a970
-
There are no other versions of this object.
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Rosman, Tom
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Bosnjak, Michael
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Silber, Henning
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Koßmann, Joanna
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Heycke, Tobias
-
PsychArchives acquisition timestamp2022-04-26T06:24:32Z
-
Made available on2022-04-26T06:24:32Z
-
Date of first publication2022-04-26
-
Abstract / DescriptionAbstract of the original article, published in Public Understanding of Science: In two studies, we examined whether open science practices, such as making the materials, data, and code of a study openly accessible, positively affect public trust in science. Furthermore, we investigated whether the potential trust-damaging effects of research being funded privately (e.g., by a commercial enterprise) may be buffered by such practices. After preregistering six hypotheses, we conducted a survey study (Study 1; N = 504) and an experimental study (Study 2; N = 588) in two German general population samples. In both studies, we found evidence for the positive effects of open science practices on trust, though it should be noted that in Study 2, results were more inconsistent. We however did not find evidence for the aforementioned buffering effect. We conclude that while open science practices may contribute to increasing trust in science, the importance of making the use of open science practices visible should not be underestimated.en
-
Abstract / DescriptionCode for: Rosman, T., Bosnjak, M., Silber, H., Koßmann, J., & Heycke, T. (2022). Open science and public trust in science: Results from two studies. Public Understanding of Science, 31(8), 1046–1062. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221100686en
-
Publication statusunknown
-
Review statuspeerReviewed
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/5884
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.6494
-
Language of contentdeu
-
PublisherPsychArchives
-
Is referenced byhttps://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221100686
-
Is related tohttps://www.psycharchives.org/handle/20.500.12034/5885
-
Is related tohttps://www.psycharchives.org/handle/20.500.12034/5886
-
Is related tohttps://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4470
-
Is related tohttps://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221100686
-
Keyword(s)epistemic trusten
-
Keyword(s)experimental studyen
-
Keyword(s)open science practicesen
-
Keyword(s)science communicationen
-
Keyword(s)survey studyen
-
Keyword(s)trust in scienceen
-
Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)150
-
TitleCode for: Open Science and public trust in science: Results from two studies. Public Understanding of Scienceen
-
DRO typecode
-
Leibniz institute name(s) / abbreviation(s)ZPID