...which doesn't make this open science thing easier to get into, talk about, or evaluate...pic.twitter.com/6ZR9rzgcWx
-
-
Replying to @chbergma @melissaekline and
Luckily you can use the words around the word you use to explain what you mean so this is largely semantics without consequences.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lakens @melissaekline and
Which would be great if others were also listening and didn't come to talks or papers or grant proposals with their preconceptions...
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Is the confusion *increased* by some people demanding the terms be used in particular ways, or decreased? I suspect the former. Language is often ambiguous and we get it by context. It seems expecting normative use where it isn’t common is the problem, not the solution.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @richarddmorey @chbergma and
Who, in this debate, has demanded normative language use? All I have seen is folks point out the issue that it can be confusing if terms with different meanings are used interchangeably. This doesn't seem contentious to me.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @EikoFried @chbergma and
I didn’t even perceive a “debate” here, but I often get “corrected” on these terms. The problem is they don’t *actually* have different meanings. They’re used interchangeably because they are interchangeable (meaning follows usage)
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @richarddmorey @EikoFried and
Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ Retweeted Daniël Lakens
Isn't the construction "I would adhere to current norms" asking others to use terms in a normative way? "I would adhere to X" implies one thinks it's a good idea to X and "norms" implies something *ehem* normative...https://twitter.com/lakens/status/1114163248171872256 …
Olivia Guest | Ολίβια Γκεστ added,
Daniël LakensVerified account @lakensReplying to @Burak_AYD1N @andrewang91 and 3 othersI know what the OCS did. I am one of the authors of the paper. It estimated the *replicability*. Reproducibility is same results with same data. The terminology has been consolidated, and I would adhere to current norms, not one project started in 2011.1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @richarddmorey and
So to answer
@EikoFried... didn't@lakens just say in this thread he prefers normative definitions?
And many do, and I can't blame them TBH. It's an appealing and simplifying way of speaking which can in many cases aid communication.2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @EikoFried and
They aid communication if they are clear, but the reproducibility/replicability distinction goes against common usage of common terms; it actually creates, rather than eliminates, communication issues. OTOH, "computational reproducibility" is clarifying.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @richarddmorey @o_guest and
Also, it's worth mentioning that the use of terminology is an in-group/out-group marker in any community....
3 replies 1 retweet 6 likes
And definitely that vibe is present here, yup.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.