Michelle Dawson posts

Post published on Bluesky on 16 Nov 2024 11:39

Bluesky DOI work crossref Extract quoted in the post External link integrated into the post

"Questionable research practices in the quantitative coding of open-ended data... can undermine scientific progress & harm those affected by the research. Unfortunately, with current standards, these questionable practices remain hidden..." journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/... autism-relevant, free

View on Bluesky

Structured cited links

1 cited resource

DOI work Fetched Post crossref

Clare Conry-Murray, Tal Waltzer, Fiona C. DeBernardi, Jessica L. Fossum, Simona Haasova, Michael S. Matthews, Aoife O’Mahony, David Moreau, et al. (2024). Validity and Transparency in Quantifying Open-Ended Data. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 7(4), 25152459241275217. SAGE Publications.

Publication date
15 Nov 2024
Identifier
10.1177/25152459241275217
Authors
Clare Conry-Murray, Tal Waltzer, Fiona C. DeBernardi, Jessica L. Fossum, Simona Haasova, Michael S. Matthews, Aoife O’Mahony, David Moreau, Myriam A. Baum, Veli-Matti Karhulahti, Randy J. McCarthy, Helena M. Paterson, Kara McSweeney, Mahmoud M. Elsherif
Source
Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
Details
7(4), 25152459241275217
Reference type
article
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Metadata source
crossref

Abstract

Quantitatively coding open-ended data (e.g., from videos, interviews) can be a rich source of information in psychological research, but reporting practices vary substantially. We provide strategies for improving validity and reliability of coding open-ended data and investigate questionable research practices in this area. First, we systematically examined articles in four top psychology journals (N = 956) and found that 21% included open-ended data coded by humans. However, only about one-third of those articles reported sufficient details to replicate or evaluate the validity of the coding process. Next, we propose multiphase guidelines for transparently reporting on the quantitative coding of open-ended data, informed by concerns with replicability, content validity, and statistical validity. The first phase involves research design, including selecting data and identifying units reliably. The second phase includes developing a coding manual and training coders. The final phase outlines how to establish reliability. As part of this phase, we used data simulations to examine a common statistic for testing reliability on open-ended data, Cohen’s κ, and found that it can become inflated when researchers repeatedly test interrater reliability or manipulate categories, such as by including a missing-data category. Finally, to facilitate transparent and valid coding of open-ended data, we provide a preregistration template that reflects these guidelines. All of the guidelines and resources provided in this article can be adapted for different types of studies, depending on context.

Study authors in this cited reference