POSTER SESSION

The Metascience 2019 Symposium offered the opportunity to present submitted posters at the meeting venue. On September the 5th 2019, on the first day of the symposium, we held a special poster session with 50 participants.

Additionally, a travel award competition was conducted with a 500 $ travel award for the 15 best posters.

During the symposium, the award money was handed over to the winners.

You now have the opportunity to see all the presented posters here on our website.

TOP 50 POSTERS

To view the posters, click below on the respective name and title.

The 15 winners are marked in blue.

• John Borghi: The library as an active collaborator in meta-science, open science, and data science
• Julia G. Bottesini: Do Participants Care If We p-Hack Their Data? A Registered Report
• Ethan C. Brown: The Lowly Worm Climbs Up a Winding Stair: Teaching the Roles of Randomness in Scientific Inference
• Zad Rafi Chow: How Surprising Are Your Data? Cognitive and Graphical Tools to Aid Applied Researchers
• Oliver James Clark: It’s always quant over qual: A pilot study on methods and barriers in qualitative psychology
• Nicholas A. Coles: The Many Smiles Collaboration: A Multi-Lab Foundational Test of the Facial Feedback Hypothesis
• Katherine S. Corker: The Magnitude of Between Sample Differences in Psychological Effects
• Luis Correia: Incidence of substudies publication after originally negative clinical trials and rate of positivation: a call for scientific integrity
• Clarissa França Dias Carneiro: Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature
• Nicholas J. DeVito: Trial Reporting on ClinicalTrial.gov – An Analysis of Compliance with the Requirements of the FDAAA 2007 Final Rule
• Sarahanne Field: When and Why to Replicate: As Easy as 1, 2, 3?
• Nicholas Fox: Better Understanding the Psychologists Who Use Questionable Research Practices
• Michael Gordon: Aggregating Replication Outcome Forecasts with Surveys and Prediction Markets
• Elise Gould: Questionable Research Practices in non-hypothesis testing research: ecological models for conservation decision-making
• Sean Grant: Open Science and Institutional Review Boards: Aligning Transparency with Regulatory Protections for Human Research Subjects
• Kaitlyn Hair: A Living Systematic Review of Alzhemer’s Disease Studies
• Daniel George Hamilton: Policies, practices and opinions about transparency in the peer review process
• Tobias Heycke: A call for comprehensive documentation of data collection procedures
• Fernando Hoces de la Guardia: A Framework for Open Policy Analysis
• Alysha Kassam: What role do non-epistemic values play in mathematical models in the social sciences?
• Dominic Kelly: Replicating and extending a meta-analysis to determine whether test design affects the magnitude of sex differences seen in mathematics
• Yuri Lazebnik: Scite: a deep learning platform to evaluate the veracity of scientific claims by citation analysis.
• Yang Liu: Aggregation via Peer Assessment
• Janine Magalhães: The Scientific Index of Integrity among Authors of Articles Published in Major Journals: a new metric for evaluating the scientific ecosystem
• Uri Maoz: Closet dualism and neuroscience—the implicit effect of philosophical world view on science
• Maya B. Mathur: Sensitivity analysis for publication bias in meta-analyses
• Dan Morgan: Open science at PLOS ONE: progress at scale
• Kleber Neves: How much reproducibility do we want? An app and model for understanding replication
• Purav Patel: Promises and Perils of Research Software Data to Support Metascience
• Alexander M. Petersen: Discrepancy in scientific authority and media visibility of climate change scientists and contrarians
• Jason Portenoy: Do Journals Still Matter in an Era of Online Academic Search?
• John Protzko: How do scientists update their beliefs? An investigation of scientists engaged in data collection
• Alan Ransil: A Dual-Process Approach for Automated Knowledge Creation
• Anisa Rowhani-Farid: Did awarding badges increase data sharing at BMJ Open? A randomised controlled trial
• Simon Schwab: Estimating publication bias in clinical trials across different specialties in medicine
• Felix Singleton Thorn: Statistical power and effect sizes in psychology are decreasing over time
• Ezgi Tanriver-Ayder: Meta-Analysis of Preclinical Data in Drug Discovery Research
• Leonid Tiokhin: Competition for priority and the cultural evolution of research strategies
• Jessica Anne Stockdale: Are qualitative and quantitative methodologies in medical science culturally and/or epistemically distinct? A philosophical investigation
• Olmo van den Akker: Preregistration in practice: A comparison of published papers and their preregistrations
• Walter Veit: Metascience of Conscioussness
• Domenico Viganola: Crowdsourcing Hypothesis Tests
• Nikolaus von Stillfried: Sham-experiments reveal a statistical error and the need for confirmatory research in the Radin double-slit experiment
• Joshua David Wallach: Age-treatment subgroup analyses in Cochrane intervention reviews: a meta-epidemiological study
• Joshua David Wallach: Vibration of effects in epidemiologic studies on the association between alcohol consumption and the risks of breast cancer
• Ana Paula Wasilewska-Sampaio: The Brazilian Reproducibility Initiative: a systematic assessment of Brazilian biomedical science
• Han Zhuang: Most Published Research Findings Maybe False, But Some Still Worth Continuing