Not So Simple: Science is in the Details

References

• Angermuller, J. (2017). Academic careers and the valuation of academics. A discursive perspective on status categories and academic salaries in France as compared to the US, Germany and Great Britain. Higher Education, 73(6), 963–980. doi:10.1007/s10734-017-0117-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azevedo, F., Jost, J. T., Rothmund, T., & Sterling, J. (2019). Neoliberal ideology and the justification of inequality in capitalist societies: Why social and economic dimensions of ideology are intertwined. Journal of Social Issues, 75(1), 49–88. doi:10.1111/josi.12310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bobbio, N. (1996). Left and right: The significance of a political distinction. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bol, T., de Vaan, M., & van de Rijt, A. (2018). The Matthew effect in science funding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(19), 4887–4890. doi:10.1073/pnas.1719557115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brembs, B., Button, K., & Munafò, M. (2013). Deep impact: Unintended consequences of journal rank. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 291. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00291
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, E. (1986). Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790). Everyman’s Library.
   Google Scholar
• Dougherty, M. R., & Horne, Z. (2019, September 18). Citation counts and journal impact factors do not capture research quality in the behavioral and brain sciences. doi:10.31234/osf.io/9g5wk
   Google Scholar
• Drutman, L. (2019). The moderate middle is a myth. Retrieved from https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-moderate-middle-is-a-myth/.
   Google Scholar
• Duarte, J. L., Crawford, J. T., Stern, C., Haidt, J., Jussim, L., & Tetlock, P. E. (2015). Political diversity will improve social psychological science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 38, e130. doi:10.1017/S0140525X14000430
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn, C. W., & Woodard, J. D. (2003). The conservative tradition in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Dyer, O. (2019). US researchers’ conflicts of interest are still widespread and under-reported, investigations find. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 367, l6931.
   Google Scholar
• Federico, C. M., & Malka, A. (2018). The contingent, contextual nature of the relationship between needs for security and certainty and political preferences: Evidence and implications. Political Psychology, 39, 3–48. doi:10.1111/pops.12477
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, S., & Johnston, C. (2014). Understanding the determinants of political ideology: Implications of structural complexity. Political Psychology, 35(3), 337–358. doi:10.1111/pops.12055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FORRT. (2019, December 13). Introducing a Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training (FORRT). https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/bnh7p.
   Google Scholar
• Freeden, M. (1996). Ideologies and political theory: A conceptual approach. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grahe, J. E., Cuccolo, K., Leighton, D. C., & Cramblet Alvarez, L. D. (2019). Open science promotes diverse, just, and sustainable research and educational outcomes. Psychology Learning & Teaching, doi:10.1177/1475725719869164
   Google Scholar
• Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. London, England. Vintage.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, J. E. (2007). Scientific reticence and sea level rise. Environmental Research Letters, 2(2), 024002. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/2/2/024002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heywood, A. (2017). Political ideologies: An introduction. London, England: Macmillan International Higher Education.
   Google Scholar
• Hilbig, B. E., & Moshagen, M. (2015). A predominance of self-identified Democrats is no evidence of a leftward bias. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 38, e146. doi:10.1017/S0140525X14001228
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, J. (2019). Americans continue to embrace political independence. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/poll/245801/americans-continue-embrace-political-independence.aspx.
   Google Scholar
• Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 307–337. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163600
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirk, R. (1987). Ten conservative principles. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1959). The essential tension: Tradition and innovation in scientific research. Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lariviere, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2018). The journal impact factor: A brief history, critique, and discussion of adverse effects. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.08992.
   Google Scholar
• Lerchenmueller, M. J., Sorenson, O., & Jena, A. B. (2019). Gender differences in how scientists present the importance of their research: Observational study. BMJ, 367, l6573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. B., Poole, K., Rosenthal, H., Boche, A., Rudkin, A., & Sonnet, L. (2018). Voteview: Congressional roll-call votes database.
   Google Scholar
• Li, W., Aste, T., Caccioli, F., & Livan, G. (2019). Early coauthorship with top scientists predicts success in academic careers. Nature Communications, 10(1), 1–9. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13130-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liem, G. A. D. (2019). Academic performance and assessment. Educational Psychology, 39(6), 705–708. doi:10.1080/01443410.2019.1625522
   Google Scholar
• Marvel, K., Schmidt, G. A., Miller, R. L., & Nazarenko, L. S. (2016). Implications for climate sensitivity from the response to individual forcings. Nature Climate Change, 6(4), 386–389. doi:10.1038/nclimate2888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merton, R. K. (1988). The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. Isis, 79(4), 606–623.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nosek, B. A., & Bar-Anan, Y. (2012). Scientific utopia: I. Opening scientific communication. Psychological Inquiry, 23(3), 217–243. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2012.692215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nosek, B. A., Spies, J. R., & Motyl, M. (2012). Scientific utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 615–631. doi:10.1177/1745691612459058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppenheimer, J. R. (2014). Atom and void: Essays on science and community (Vol. 999). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, M., Cowtan, K., Hawkins, E., & Stolpe, M. B. (2016). Reconciled climate response estimates from climate models and the energy budget of Earth. Nature Climate Change, 6(10), 931–935. doi:10.1038/nclimate3066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sagan, C. (1980). Broca’s brain: Reflections on the romance of science. New York, NY: Random House Digital, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Sagan, C. (1989). Why we need to understand science. Parade Magazine, pp. 10.
   Google Scholar
• Schäfer, T., & Schwarz, M. (2019). The meaningfulness of effect sizes in psychological research: Differences between sub-disciplines and the impact of potential biases. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 813. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silbiger, N. J., & Stubler, A. D. (2019). Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM. PeerJ, 7, e8247. doi:10.7717/peerj.8247
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skute, I. (2019). Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 120(1), 237–265. doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03116-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tennant, J. P. (2018). The state of the art in peer review. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 365(19), fny204. doi:10.1093/femsle/fny204
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Left and right: A basic dimension of ideology and personality. In R. W. White (Ed.), The study of lives (pp. 388–411). New York, NY: Atherton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tomkins, A., Zhang, M., & Heavlin, W. D. (2017). Reviewer bias in single-versus double-blind peer review. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(48), 12708–12713.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uhlmann, E. L., Chartier, C. R., Ebersole, C. R., Errington, T. M., Kidwell, M., Lai, C. K., … Nosek, B. A. (2018). Scientific utopia: III. Crowdsourcing science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(5), 711–733.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wadhwani, R. D., Galvez-Behar, G., Mercelis, J., & Guagnini, A. (2017). Academic Entrepreneurship and Institutional Change in Historical Perspective. Management & Organizational History, 12(3), 175–198. doi:10.1080/17449359.2017.1359903
   Google Scholar
• Wei, S., Waldman, A., & Armstrong, D. (2019). Dollar for Profs. Dig into University Researchers’ outside income and conflicts of interest. Retrieved from https://projects.propublica.org/dollars-for-profs/.
   Google Scholar