I’m Dr. Sarahanne Field. I’m a metascientist, which means that I use the scientific method to study scientists, scientific practices, and the scientific culture and context in which it is embedded. I have multiple interests in this discipline, including preregistration and registered reports, replication and what should/does go into choosing a replication target, responsible and ethical research conduct, error in science, and the science reform movement and its associated communities. I’m a mixed methodologist, which to me means that I adapt my methodological approach depending on the question I am asking, and am not limited to either a quantitative or qualitative approach. In practice, I like to combine methods whenever I can because it often yields a more interesting picture than just one approach! Finally, I’m the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Trial and Error, a new diamond open access journal that spotlights error and null findings, and prompts reflection on why things go wrong in science.
Project Title
Pull out a seat at the table! Addressing the paucity of Global South perspectives in the science reform discourse
Behavioral change(s) addressed
The science reform movement is associated not only with institutional and publication reforms, but with behavioral reforms too. Traditionally, research activity has been obscured from view, with data collection conducted behind closed doors, and research reports published behind paywalls. Sub-0.05 p-values were chased using dubious methods, and data were tortured to conform to cleaner, neater standards. Hypotheses were adjusted after seeing the results, and failed studies were relegated to file drawers. Science reform addresses these elements of problematic research behavior also, promoting integrity and openness, and the embracing of null findings.
Theoretical approach
While metascience, the ‘discipline’ in which this project sits, is not devoid of theory (indeed, metascientists debate the application of Merton, Latour and Popper readily), its theoretical traditions are not yet established. This is largely because the discipline, if one can even call it that (plenty of people will strenuously deny that it is), is so young. This means that the theoretical approaches are broad and somewhat vague. There’s an extent, however, to which feminist and postcolonial scholarship will inform this project, given that (for instance) power structures need to be considered in this problem.
Empirical research strategies
This project lends itself to a mixed method approach. The Veni plan it is associated with discusses ethnography and the Delphi method, for instance. However, the plans are, as yet, very underdeveloped.
Possibilities for inter- and transdisciplinary collaboration
There is a strong need for input from humanities researchers here!
Social transition(s) addressed
The transition from traditional academia - in which a problematic culture of publish or perish is fostered - to a reformed academia in which elements of academia such as rewards and recognition, publishing and scientific methodology are developed in line with contemporary goals of inclusivity, accountability, and openness. Going beyond this, however, is an emphasis on including the voices of Global South researchers in the science reform discourse. Currently, the discourse is largely developed with participation from wealthy, white, western institutions, with little attempt to ensure that the needs and priorities of Global South participants are adequately represented.