IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/econwp/qt95g5h77z.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Survey of open science practices and attitudes in the social sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Ferguson, Joel
  • Littman, Rebecca
  • Christensen, Garret
  • Paluck, Elizabeth
  • Swanson, Nicholas
  • Wang, Zenan
  • Miguel, Edward
  • Birke, David
  • Pezzuto, John-Henry

Abstract

Open science practices such as posting data or code and pre-registering analyses are increasingly prescribed and debated in the applied sciences, but the actual popularity and lifetime usage of these practices remain unknown. This study provides an assessment of attitudes toward, use of, and perceived norms regarding open science practices from a sample of authors published in top-10 (most-cited) journals and PhD students in top-20 ranked North American departments from four major social science disciplines: economics, political science, psychology, and sociology. We observe largely favorable private attitudes toward widespread lifetime usage (meaning that a researcher has used a particular practice at least once) of open science practices. As of 2020, nearly 90% of scholars had ever used at least one such practice. Support for posting data or code online is higher (88% overall support and nearly at the ceiling in some fields) than support for pre-registration (58% overall). With respect to norms, there is evidence that the scholars in our sample appear to underestimate the use of open science practices in their field. We also document that the reported lifetime prevalence of open science practices increased from 49% in 2010 to 87% a decade later.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferguson, Joel & Littman, Rebecca & Christensen, Garret & Paluck, Elizabeth & Swanson, Nicholas & Wang, Zenan & Miguel, Edward & Birke, David & Pezzuto, John-Henry, 2023. "Survey of open science practices and attitudes in the social sciences," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt95g5h77z, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:econwp:qt95g5h77z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/95g5h77z.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cdl:econwp:qt3vx87730 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Lucas C. Coffman & Muriel Niederle, 2015. "Pre-analysis Plans Have Limited Upside, Especially Where Replications Are Feasible," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 81-98, Summer.
    3. Garret Christensen & Allan Dafoe & Edward Miguel & Don A Moore & Andrew K Rose, 2019. "A study of the impact of data sharing on article citations using journal policies as a natural experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-13, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Balafoutas, Loukas & Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Umashev, Nicholas, 2025. "Incentives and the replication crisis in social sciences: A critical review of open science practices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    2. Taisuke Imai & Séverine Toussaert & Aurélien Baillon & Anna Drever & Seda Ertaç & Magnus Johannesson & Levent Neyse & Marie Claire Villeval, 2025. "Pre-Registration and Pre-Analysis Plans in Experimental Economics," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 530, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    3. Rose, Julian & Neubauer, Florian & Ankel-Peters, Jörg, 2024. "Long-term effects of the targeting the ultra-poor program: A reproducibility and replicability assessment of Banerjee et al. (2021)," Ruhr Economic Papers 1107, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    4. Douglas Kiarelly Godoy de Araujo, 2025. "Open-sourced central bank macroeconomic models," IFC Bulletins chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Data science in central banking: enhancing the access to and sharing of data, volume 64, Bank for International Settlements.
    5. Felix Holzmeister & Magnus Johannesson & Robert Böhm & Anna Dreber & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler, 2023. "Heterogeneity in effect size estimates: Empirical evidence and practical implications," Working Papers 2023-17, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    6. Bensch, Gunther & Rose, Julian & Brodeur, Abel & Ankel-Peters, Jörg, 2025. "The Robustness Dashboard," I4R Discussion Paper Series 234, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
      • Bensch, Gunther & Rose, Julian & Brodeur, Abel & Ankel-Peters, Jörg, 2025. "The robustness dashboard," Ruhr Economic Papers 1167, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    7. repec:osf:socarx:rkyf7_v1 is not listed on IDEAS

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abel Brodeur & Nikolai M. Cook & Jonathan S. Hartley & Anthony Heyes, 2024. "Do Preregistration and Preanalysis Plans Reduce p-Hacking and Publication Bias? Evidence from 15,992 Test Statistics and Suggestions for Improvement," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(3), pages 527-561.
    2. Brodeur, Abel & Cook, Nikolai & Hartley, Jonathan & Heyes, Anthony, 2022. "Do Pre-Registration and Pre-analysis Plans Reduce p-Hacking and Publication Bias?," MetaArXiv uxf39, Center for Open Science.
    3. Joel Ferguson & Rebecca Littman & Garret Christensen & Elizabeth Levy Paluck & Nicholas Swanson & Zenan Wang & Edward Miguel & David Birke & John-Henry Pezzuto, 2023. "Survey of open science practices and attitudes in the social sciences," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    5. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    6. Troy J. Bouffard & Ekaterina Uryupova & Klaus Dodds & Vladimir E. Romanovsky & Alec P. Bennett & Dmitry Streletskiy, 2021. "Scientific Cooperation: Supporting Circumpolar Permafrost Monitoring and Data Sharing," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Lucas C. Coffman & Muriel Niederle & Alistair J. Wilson, 2017. "A Proposal to Organize and Promote Replications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 41-45, May.
    8. Roy Chen & Yan Chen & Yohanes E. Riyanto, 2021. "Best practices in replication: a case study of common information in coordination games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 2-30, March.
    9. Charness, Gary & Le Bihan, Yves & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2024. "Mindfulness training, cognitive performance and stress reduction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 207-226.
    10. Lergetporer, P & Woessmann, L, 2022. "Income Contingency and the Electorates Support for Tuition," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 606, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    11. Bauhoff, Sebastian & Busch, Jonah, 2020. "Does deforestation increase malaria prevalence? Evidence from satellite data and health surveys," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Maximilian Kasy & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Optimal Pre-Analysis Plans: Statistical Decisions Subject to Implementability," Papers 2208.09638, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    13. Burlig, Fiona, 2018. "Improving transparency in observational social science research: A pre-analysis plan approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 56-60.
    14. Weili Ding, 2020. "Laboratory experiments can pre-design to address power and selection issues," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(2), pages 125-138, December.
    15. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    16. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    17. Sevim, Dilek & Baranov, Victoria & Bhalotra, Sonia R. & Maselko, Joanna & Biroli, Pietro, 2023. "Socioemotional Skills in Early Childhood: Evidence from a Maternal Psychosocial Intervention," IZA Discussion Papers 15925, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Maximilian Kasy & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Rationalizing Pre-Analysis Plans:Statistical Decisions Subject to Implementability," Economics Series Working Papers 975, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    19. Brown, Martin & Hentschel, Nicole & Mettler, Hannes & Stix, Helmut, 2022. "The convenience of electronic payments and consumer cash demand," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 86-102.
    20. Luigi Butera & Philip Grossman & Daniel Houser & John List & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2020. "A New Mechanism to Alleviate the Crises of Confidence in Science - With an Application to the Public Goods Game," Artefactual Field Experiments 00684, The Field Experiments Website.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:econwp:qt95g5h77z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ibbrkus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.