scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Gisela Govaart

Other affiliations: Charité, Max Planck Society
Bio: Gisela Govaart is an academic researcher from Humboldt University of Berlin. The author has contributed to research in topics: Hindsight bias & Epistemology. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 7 citations. Previous affiliations of Gisela Govaart include Charité & Max Planck Society.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present an overview of the problems associated with undisclosed analytic flexibility, discuss why and how EEG researchers would benefit from adopting preregistration, provide guidelines and examples on how to preregister data preprocessing and analysis steps in typical ERP studies, and conclude by discussing possibilities and limitations of this open science practice.

26 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Samantha Parsons, Flavio Azevedo, Mahmoud Elsherif, Samuel Guay, Owen N. Shahim, Gisela Govaart, Emma Norris, Aoife M. O'Mahony, Adam Jackson Parker, Ana Todorovic, Charlotte Rebecca Pennington, Elias Garcia-Pelegrin, Aleksandra Lazić, Olly Robertson, Sara L. Middleton, Beatrice Valentini, J. D. McCuaig, Bradley J. Baker, Elizabeth Collins, Adrien Fillon, Tina B. Lonsdorf, Michele C. Lim, Norbert Vanek, Marton Kovacs, Timothy Roettger, Sonia Rishi, Jacob F Miranda, Matt Jaquiery, Suzanne Stewart, Valeria Agostini, Andrew K. Stewart, Kamil Izydorczak, Sarah Ashcroft-Jones, Helena Hartmann, Madeleine Ingham, Yuki Yamada, Martin R. Vasilev, Filip Děchtěrenko, Nihan Albayrak-Aydemir, Yufei Yang, LaPlume A. Annalise, Julia Wolska, Emma L Henderson, M Zaneva, Benjamin Farrar, Ross Mounce, Tamar Kalandadze, Wanyin Li, Qin Xiao, Robert M. Ross, Siu Kit Yeung, Meng Liu, Micah Vandegrift, Zoltan Kekecs, Marta Topor, Myriam A. Baum, Emily A. Williams, Asma A. Assaneea, Amélie Bret, Aidan G Cashin, N. Talley Ballou, Tsvetomira Dumbalska, Bettina Kern, Claire Melia, Beatrix Joy Yvonne Michelle Arendt, G. H. Vineyard, Jade S. Pickering, Thomas Rhys Evans, Catherine Laverty, Elizabeth Woodward, David Moreau, Dominique G. Roche, Eike Mark Rinke, Graham Wightman Reid, Eduardo Garcia-Garzon, Steven Verheyen, Halil Emre Kocalar, Ashley R Blake, J.P. Cockcroft, Leticia Micheli, Brice Beffara Bret, Zoe M. Flack, Barnabas Szaszi, Markus Weinmann, Oscar Lecuona, Birgit Schmidt, William X. Q. Ngiam, Ana Barbosa Mendes, Shannon Francis, Brett Gall, Mariella Paul, Connor Tom Keating, Magdalena Grose-Hodge, James E. Bartlett, Bethan J Iley, Lisa Spitzer, Madeleine Pownall, Christopher J Graham, Tobias Wingen, Jennifer Terry, C. M. F. Oliveira, Ryan A. Millager, Kerry Jane Fox, Alaa Aldoh, Alexander Hart, O. V. D. Akker, Gilad Feldman, Dominik A Kiersz, Christina Pomareda, Kai Krautter, Ali H. Al-Hoorie, Balazs Aczel 
TL;DR: The Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Teaching (FORRT) community presents a crowdsourced glossary of open scholarship terms to facilitate education and effective communication between experts and newcomers as mentioned in this paper .
Abstract: Open scholarship has transformed research, and introduced a host of new terms in the lexicon of researchers. The ‘Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Teaching’ (FORRT) community presents a crowdsourced glossary of open scholarship terms to facilitate education and effective communication between experts and newcomers.

21 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors make the case for integrating reflexivity across all research approaches, before providing a "beginner's guide" for quantitative researchers wishing to engage reflexively with their own work, providing concrete recommendations, worked examples, and reflexive prompts.
Abstract: Reflexivity is the act of examining one's own assumption, belief, and judgement systems, and thinking carefully and critically about how these influence the research process. The practice of reflexivity confronts and questions who we are as researchers and how this guides our work. It is central in debates on objectivity, subjectivity, and the very foundations of social science research and generated knowledge. Incorporating reflexivity in the research process is traditionally recognized as one of the most notable differences between qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Qualitative research centres and celebrates the participants' personal and unique lived experience. Therefore, qualitative researchers are readily encouraged to consider how their own unique positionalities inform the research process and this forms an important part of training within this paradigm. Quantitative methodologies in social and personality psychology, and more generally, on the other hand, have remained seemingly detached from this level of reflexivity and general reflective practice. In this commentary, we, three quantitative researchers who have grappled with the compatibility of reflexivity within our own research, argue that reflexivity has much to offer quantitative methodologists. The act of reflexivity prompts researchers to acknowledge and centre their own positionalities, encourages a more thoughtful engagement with every step of the research process, and thus, as we argue, contributes to the ongoing reappraisal of openness and transparency in psychology. In this paper, we make the case for integrating reflexivity across all research approaches, before providing a ‘beginner's guide’ for quantitative researchers wishing to engage reflexively with their own work, providing concrete recommendations, worked examples, and reflexive prompts.

8 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review three types of measurements metrics: data quality, group-level internal consistency, and subject level internal consistency and demonstrate how failing to consider data quality and internal consistency can undermine statistical inferences.

32 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that most methodological reform attempts suffer from similar mistakes and over-generalizations to the ones they aim to address, and they argue that this can be attributed in part to lack of formalism and first principles.
Abstract: Current attempts at methodological reform in sciences come in response to an overall lack of rigor in methodological and scientific practices in experimental sciences. However, most methodological reform attempts suffer from similar mistakes and over-generalizations to the ones they aim to address. We argue that this can be attributed in part to lack of formalism and first principles. Considering the costs of allowing false claims to become canonized, we argue for formal statistical rigor and scientific nuance in methodological reform. To attain this rigor and nuance, we propose a five-step formal approach for solving methodological problems. To illustrate the use and benefits of such formalism, we present a formal statistical analysis of three popular claims in the metascientific literature: (i) that reproducibility is the cornerstone of science; (ii) that data must not be used twice in any analysis; and (iii) that exploratory projects imply poor statistical practice. We show how our formal approach can inform and shape debates about such methodological claims.

25 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , the authors provide an integrated overview of community-developed resources that can support collaborative, open, reproducible, replicable, robust and generalizable neuroimaging throughout the entire research cycle from inception to publication.

24 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors provide recommendations for the use of these methods, with a focus on foundational aspects of frequency domain and time-frequency analyses, and provide publication guidelines, which aim to foster replication and scientific rigor, assist new researchers who wish to enter the field of brain oscillations, and facilitate communication among authors, reviewers, and editors.
Abstract: Since its beginnings in the early 20th century, the psychophysiological study of human brain function has included research into the spectral properties of electrical and magnetic brain signals. Now, dramatic advances in digital signal processing, biophysics, and computer science have enabled increasingly sophisticated methodology for neural time series analysis. Innovations in hardware and recording techniques have further expanded the range of tools available to researchers interested in measuring, quantifying, modeling, and altering the spectral properties of neural time series. These tools are increasingly used in the field, by a growing number of researchers who vary in their training, background, and research interests. Implementation and reporting standards also vary greatly in the published literature, causing challenges for authors, readers, reviewers, and editors alike. The present report addresses this issue by providing recommendations for the use of these methods, with a focus on foundational aspects of frequency domain and time-frequency analyses. It also provides publication guidelines, which aim to (1) foster replication and scientific rigor, (2) assist new researchers who wish to enter the field of brain oscillations, and (3) facilitate communication among authors, reviewers, and editors.

24 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors present a critical review of iEEG research practices in a didactic framework for newcomers, as well addressing issues encountered by proficient researchers, and suggest potential guidelines for working with the data and answer frequently asked questions based on the most widespread practices.

23 citations