Mannheim Open Science Day Reprohack

Event Description

Welcome to the Mannheim Open Science Day ReproHack!

The Mannheim Open Science Day ReproHack is an event at the University of Mannheim for researchers from all disciplines and follows the talks and discussion from the Mannheim Open Science Day, but can also been attended individually. The goal of the ReproHack is to reproduce published research from a list of proposed papers with publicly available associated code and data. Participants get to work with other people’s material in a low pressure environment and record their experiences on a number of key aspects, including reproducibility, transparency and reusability of materials. At the end of the day we regroup, share our experiences and give feedback to the authors.

It’s important to highlight that our events are by no means an attempt to criticise or discredit work. We see reproduction as beneficial scientific activity in itself, with useful outcomes for authors and valuable learning experiences for the participants and the research community as a whole.

Registration

The ReproHack in Mannheim is open for all researchers which are interested in reproducibility and wants to have some hands-on experience. There is no participants fee. The expenses are paid by the Open Science Office of the University of Mannheim. Click here to register.

By joining our event, you agree to abide by our Code of Conduct

Venue

The event will take place at the University of Mannheim in the castle:

The room is SO 418 which is on the 4th floor of the Schloss Schneckenhof Ost (SO) in the tower towards the main station (Bahnhofsturm). We will provide some simple lunch at the event as well as coffee, water etc.

Agenda

Host / Speaker Bios

Host: Anna Krystalli

Anna is a Research Software Engineering Consultant specialising in R. She is founder of the ReproHack project and has extensive experience in hosting ReproHacks. Overall her passion lies in helping researchers do more with their code and data and transition to a more transparent, reproducible and open way of working.

Speaker: Joel Nitta

Joel studies the ecology and evolution of ferns. He is enthusiastic adherent of reproducible analysis and coding, especially with R.

Speaker: Camille Landesvatter

Camille is a research associate at the Mannheim Center for European Social Research (MZES), where she is currently pursuing her PhD. Together with Paul C. Bauer, she has written templates on how to incorporate R Markdown and Pagedown into writing reproducible manuscripts.

Two ways to get involved:

Nominate a paper

We invite nominations for papers that have both associated code and data publicly available. We also encourage analyses based on open source tools as we cannot guarantee participants will have access to specialised licenced software.

See list below for paper associated with this event or browse the full list of submitted papers. You can also consult our author guidelines for more information.

Review and reproduce a paper

Join us at the hack to dig into exciting science, learn more about reproducibility, working with other people’s code and data and more!

On the day

We’ll track of discussions and collaborative notes on the event hackpad

As all ReproHack events, we strive to make this event open and inclusive to all. As such the event is governed by the ReproHack Code of Conduct.Please read it before participating. By participating, you are expected to uphold this code.

Authors

We encourage authors that are keen and submitting to a specific event, to engage with the event, even just to say hello! You can do so on twitter (check for event specific hashtags or use @ReproHack) or by joining the review-chat channel in our slack group. We’ve also set up an authors channel in our slack group as a place where you can reach the organisers prior to the hack.

Participants

Introduction & Welcome

1. Project review and team formation

We’ll start with a brief review of the available papers and then form into teams. Feel free to work on your own if you prefer but we highly recommend you discuss your experiences with fellow participants as you work.

2. Select and register a paper

• Add your details in the participants section of the hackpad so we have a complete list of participants (e.g name, affiliation, social links, pronouns etc).

• In your teams, (or individually if you prefer) decide which paper you wish to work on.

• Create user accounts on the Hub for all reviewers that want to be associated with the review.

• Register your team and paper by logging the title of the selected paper and the name(s) of the reviewer(s) in the hackpad. You can use the following template:

  ### **Paper:** <Title of the paper reproduced>
  **Reviewers:** Reviewer 1, Reviewer 2 etc.
  

3. Work on your paper!

Follow any instructions/documentation associated with the papers and try and reproduce the work. As you work through your paper, keep in mind the main points on which feedback to the authors will provided, Access, Reproducibility, Documentation and Reusability (see our participant guidelines for more information). It might help to have a look at the Review form before you begin and keep notes during your review. Feel free to use the event hackpad to record general findings you wish to share with the group.

We’ll come together during the day to discuss progress and troubleshoot any sticking points.

Should you finish reproducing your paper quickly, feel free to explore the work more deeply. For example, you could try and run additional analyses, create new plots or even combine materials with your own or other open materials available on the web!

Should you produce any additional materials relating to your reproduction during the session (e.g. a markdown report, jupyter notebook, issue or pull requets in authors repository), feel free to share it publicly and add any links to such materials to the hackpad.

4. Complete your Review with feedback for the authors

The most important part of the day is recording our experiences as feedback to the authors. Please make sure to complete a Review feedback form for the paper you've selected, ideally, by the end of the day. Please also remember to be kind and constructive. Reproducibilty is hard and all authors submitting their papers have been incredibly brave. Feel free to browse any public feedback submissions to get inspiration.

5. Feedback to the group on your experiences

You can use the hackpad to take notes and summarise your experiences.

6. Closing Remarks

Collaborative note taking:

Feel free to contribute any additional thoughts on our collaborative hackpad. These can help form the basis for a blogpost on the event.

Associated papers

• Alcohol-induced retrograde facilitation? Mixed evidence in a preregistered replication and encoding-maintenance-retrieval analysis

  Authors: Julian Quevedo Pütter, Edgar Erdfelder

  DOI:  10.31234/osf.io/vxufw

  Submitted by jquevedo  

    Mean reproducibility score:   8.8/10   |   Number of reviews:   4

  ---

  Why should we attempt to reproduce this paper?

  This paper has already been accepted as a registered report at Stage-1. The Stage-2 manuscript has no yet been accepted for publication, so improvements in the code could still be incorporated in the final manuscript.

  Tags: R Conceptual replication Cognitive psychology Multinomial processing tree (MPT) modeling