diff --git a/.codespell-ignore.txt b/.codespell-ignore.txt new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..a5305752f5c --- /dev/null +++ b/.codespell-ignore.txt @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +# Project-specific terms and proper nouns for FORRT +# Add one word per line (case-insensitive by default) + +# Project names and acronyms +FORRT +forrt +OSF +preregistration +CREP +Gilad +Feldman + +# Research/Academic terms +metascience +reprohack +preregistrations +replicability +reproducibility + +# Names and organizations +Kathawalla +Priya +Angelika +Stefan +behavioural +recognised +organised +grey +Hart +Tennant +Strack +Shepard +NWO +nwo +Soler +Yau +Carmel +Loder +Udo +Ned +Ans + +# Technical terms +hugo +blogdown +netlify +yaml +Github +VSCode +agrc + +# Common acceptable variations +behaviour +honour +colour +favour +centre +practise +organisation +recognise +organise +theses +re-use +re-used +alpha-numeric +Homogenous +ABl +wont +ublication +commend +ons +tru +Vizualization +ist +sie + +# Legal/formal terms +recuse +recusal + +# Additional project-specific terms +Didactical +AREN's +ND +Zenodo +OT + +# Hyphenated words that are acceptable diff --git a/.codespellrc b/.codespellrc new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..3ec34e39375 --- /dev/null +++ b/.codespellrc @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +[codespell] +# Skip these files and directories +skip = .git,*.png,*.jpg,*.jpeg,*.gif,*.svg,*.ico,*.woff,*.woff2,*.ttf,*.eot,*.min.js,*.min.css,themes,node_modules,public,resources,static/admin,*.lock,package-lock.json,.hugo_build.lock,go.sum,*.json,*.css,*.scss,*.toml,content/glossary/german,content/glossary/portuguese,content/glossary/arabic,content/glossary/spanish,content/glossary/french,data,*.pdf + +# Ignore these words (project-specific terms and proper nouns) +ignore-words = .codespell-ignore.txt + +# Check file names as well +check-filenames = + +# Check hidden files +check-hidden = + +# Exclude certain patterns in files +ignore-regex = (https?://|www\.|[A-Za-z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Za-z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z|a-z]{2,}|) diff --git a/.github/workflows/spell-check.yaml b/.github/workflows/spell-check.yaml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..4556f3ae925 --- /dev/null +++ b/.github/workflows/spell-check.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ +name: Spell Check + +# ======================= +# Automated Spell Checking +# ======================= +# Purpose: Checks for spelling errors in pull requests using codespell +# Triggers: PR opened, synchronized, or reopened +# Reports: Comments on PR with potential typos and suggestions + +on: + pull_request: + types: [opened, synchronize, reopened] + +permissions: + contents: read + issues: write + pull-requests: write + +jobs: + spell-check: + runs-on: ubuntu-latest + + steps: + - name: Checkout repository + uses: actions/checkout@v4 + + - name: Set up Python + uses: actions/setup-python@v5 + with: + python-version: '3.x' + + - name: Install codespell + run: | + python -m pip install --upgrade pip + pip install codespell + + - name: Run Spell Check Script + id: spell_check + run: | + python scripts/spell_check/check_spelling.py + + - name: Find Comment + uses: peter-evans/find-comment@v3 + id: fc + with: + issue-number: ${{ github.event.pull_request.number }} + comment-author: 'github-actions[bot]' + body-includes: Spell Check Results + + - name: Create or update comment + uses: peter-evans/create-or-update-comment@v4 + with: + comment-id: ${{ steps.fc.outputs.comment-id }} + issue-number: ${{ github.event.pull_request.number }} + body: ${{ steps.spell_check.outputs.comment }} + edit-mode: replace diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md index 9b1942d8d7d..7f2cad98942 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ A way to run the project locally without installing Hugo on the host machine is 2. Open `.devcontainer/devcontainer.json` in VSCode. If you are on a Windows host, go to `.devcontainer\dev\devcontainer.json` and uncomment the line `"remoteUser": "root"` before continuing. 3. In the context menu of VSCode (Crl + Shift + P), select `Dev Containers: Open Folder in Container`. Alternatively, a pop-up will appear in the bottom right corner of the window asking if you want to open the folder in a container. Click on `Reopen in Container`. 4. Wait for the container to build. The context of VS Code will change. In the bottom left corner, you will see a green icon with the name of the container (Hugo Dev). -5. Run `hugo server -D`. The container will foward port 1313 to the host machine, so you can access the website at `http://localhost:1313`. +5. Run `hugo server -D`. The container will forward port 1313 to the host machine, so you can access the website at `http://localhost:1313`. ### Development - R-Studio diff --git a/content/OS-developing-world/OS-developing-world.md b/content/OS-developing-world/OS-developing-world.md index 5da2bbe9e6d..c52eac67652 100644 --- a/content/OS-developing-world/OS-developing-world.md +++ b/content/OS-developing-world/OS-developing-world.md @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ Our FORRT community will support this initiative by leveraging and sharing our e ### Why This Project Is Needed --------------------- -Open Science has gained significant traction in developed countries and is endorsed by major organizations such as UNESCO, NASA, White House and other world players. However, the principles of Open Science—inclusing diversity, equity, inclusivity, and accessibility (DEIA)—are not fully realized in developing regions. Researchers in these countries face unique challenges, including limited resources, lack of infrastructure, and systemic barriers that hinder the adoption of Open Science practices. FORRT was established to empower early career scholars, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, by providing curated learning and teaching materials on Open Science. Since its inception, FORRT has advocated for integrating social justice principles in both research and teaching. This collaboration aligns with FORRT’s mission by addressing these challenges head-on, aiming to level the educational landscape and promote equity in scientific research globally. +Open Science has gained significant traction in developed countries and is endorsed by major organizations such as UNESCO, NASA, White House and other world players. However, the principles of Open Science—including diversity, equity, inclusivity, and accessibility (DEIA)—are not fully realized in developing regions. Researchers in these countries face unique challenges, including limited resources, lack of infrastructure, and systemic barriers that hinder the adoption of Open Science practices. FORRT was established to empower early career scholars, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, by providing curated learning and teaching materials on Open Science. Since its inception, FORRT has advocated for integrating social justice principles in both research and teaching. This collaboration aligns with FORRT’s mission by addressing these challenges head-on, aiming to level the educational landscape and promote equity in scientific research globally. This joint initiative with [the Chinese Open Science Network](https://open-sci.cn/) is a step towards realizing FORRT’s vision of an inclusive and equitable Open Science community, reflecting our commitment to accessibility, diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, and social justice. [See this page in the COSN's website here](https://opensci-cn.github.io/OS-developing-world/). diff --git a/content/about/partnerships/partnerships.md b/content/about/partnerships/partnerships.md index 1ca092439a0..f6ced91bd8f 100644 --- a/content/about/partnerships/partnerships.md +++ b/content/about/partnerships/partnerships.md @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ classtitle = "text-center"
-The African Reproducibility Network (AREN) logo [The African Reproducibility Network (AREN)](https://africanrn.org/) is a community-led grassroots initiative which seeks to bridge the gaps in open science (OS) across Africa. AREN’s mission is to furnish African researchers with the necessary support and resources through training and workshops tailored to the local context, ensuring they are well-equipped to meet the growing global demand for openness and reproducibility in research. We also seek to establish local networks at universities and research institutes across Africa that will serve as advocay hubs for collaboration and cooperation, providing research communities with the necessary support for adopting and practising OS principles while also ensuring institutions are better prepared to implement OS policies. +The African Reproducibility Network (AREN) logo [The African Reproducibility Network (AREN)](https://africanrn.org/) is a community-led grassroots initiative which seeks to bridge the gaps in open science (OS) across Africa. AREN’s mission is to furnish African researchers with the necessary support and resources through training and workshops tailored to the local context, ensuring they are well-equipped to meet the growing global demand for openness and reproducibility in research. We also seek to establish local networks at universities and research institutes across Africa that will serve as advocacy hubs for collaboration and cooperation, providing research communities with the necessary support for adopting and practising OS principles while also ensuring institutions are better prepared to implement OS policies.
diff --git a/content/awop/index.md b/content/awop/index.md index 644c0b6e6d2..bf939285f5e 100644 --- a/content/awop/index.md +++ b/content/awop/index.md @@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ # FORRT page type = "widget_page" headless = false # Homepage is headless, other widget pages are not. -title = "Academic Wheel of Priviledge (AWoP)" +title = "Academic Wheel of Privilege (AWoP)" # url = "/awop" +++ diff --git a/content/coc.md b/content/coc.md index e5a570687f6..d0b4db40d16 100644 --- a/content/coc.md +++ b/content/coc.md @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Our open community strives to: - **Use preferred pronouns (e.g. she/her/hers, they/their/theirs, he/him/his).** -- **Be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences**: Not all of us will agree all the time, but disagreement is no excuse for poor behaviour and poor manners. We might all experience some frustration now and then, but we cannot allow that frustration to turn into a personal attack. It’s important to remember that a community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not a productive one. It is important to demonstrate empathy and kindness toward other people. Please keep in mind that viewpoints and opinions must not interfere with, hinder, or restrain our strongly-held community values on social justice, diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibilty. +- **Be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences**: Not all of us will agree all the time, but disagreement is no excuse for poor behaviour and poor manners. We might all experience some frustration now and then, but we cannot allow that frustration to turn into a personal attack. It’s important to remember that a community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not a productive one. It is important to demonstrate empathy and kindness toward other people. Please keep in mind that viewpoints and opinions must not interfere with, hinder, or restrain our strongly-held community values on social justice, diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility. - **Try to understand why we disagree**: Disagreements, both social and technical, happen all the time. It is important that we resolve disagreements and differing views constructively by giving and gracefully accepting constructive feedback. Remember that we’re different. Diversity contributes to the strength of our community, which is composed of people from a wide range of backgrounds. Different people have different perspectives on issues. Being unable to understand why someone holds a viewpoint doesn’t mean that they’re wrong. Don’t forget that it is human to err and blaming each other doesn’t get us anywhere. Instead, focus on helping to resolve issues and learning from mistakes. diff --git a/content/contributor-analysis/index.Rmd b/content/contributor-analysis/index.Rmd index d638f1e47f6..ab87820d3cf 100644 --- a/content/contributor-analysis/index.Rmd +++ b/content/contributor-analysis/index.Rmd @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ dt <- bind_rows(data_list, .id = "Source_Sheet") dt <- dt %>% select(`Project Name`, everything()) -# Remove PM column as it is unncessary and might cause problems with binding +# Remove PM column as it is unnecessary and might cause problems with binding dt <- dt %>% select(-`Project Managers`) ``` diff --git a/content/contributor-analysis/network-graph.Rmd b/content/contributor-analysis/network-graph.Rmd index bd7a8a32d2c..1ab83d430d8 100644 --- a/content/contributor-analysis/network-graph.Rmd +++ b/content/contributor-analysis/network-graph.Rmd @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ dt <- bind_rows(data_list, .id = "Source_Sheet") dt <- dt %>% select(`Project Name`, everything()) -# Remove PM column as it is unncessary and might cause problems with binding +# Remove PM column as it is unnecessary and might cause problems with binding dt <- dt %>% select(-`Project Managers`) ``` @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ ContributorGroups_nodes <- dt_long %>% colnames(ContributorGroups_nodes) <- c("id", "projects") Contributor_nodes <- left_join(Contributor_nodes_n, ContributorGroups_nodes) -Contributor_nodes$title <- paste0(Contributor_nodes$id,"
", gsub(patter = ",", replacement = "
", x = Contributor_nodes$projects)) +Contributor_nodes$title <- paste0(Contributor_nodes$id,"
", gsub(pattern = ",", replacement = "
", x = Contributor_nodes$projects)) ``` ```{r create-edges} diff --git a/content/dei/2-intro-text.md b/content/dei/2-intro-text.md index 6ccef2bedbb..6763e225c64 100644 --- a/content/dei/2-intro-text.md +++ b/content/dei/2-intro-text.md @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ Hence, we at FORRT, have devised ***4 ways*** to be proactive in the outreach to * FORRT's ***Open Office Hours*** - Periodically, and at least once a month, the FORRT community will hold its Open and Reproducible Science *"office hours"* for anyone in the world wishing to learn, adopt, and disseminate open and reproducible science tenets, as well as those with interest or questions about teaching and mentoring these concepts, and/or raising awareness of its pedagogical implications and its associated challenges (e.g., curricular reform, epistemological uncertainty, methods of education). - - Please check the [calendar of meetings](#calendar-mentorship) down below. The first meeting will happen Friday, October 30th, 2020. All necessary information should be available in the Google calender, but also feel free to [email us.](mailto:info@forrt.org) + - Please check the [calendar of meetings](#calendar-mentorship) down below. The first meeting will happen Friday, October 30th, 2020. All necessary information should be available in the Google calendar, but also feel free to [email us.](mailto:info@forrt.org)
diff --git a/content/glossary/english/plan_s.md b/content/glossary/english/plan_s.md index 54c88a895ca..3cc384f520b 100644 --- a/content/glossary/english/plan_s.md +++ b/content/glossary/english/plan_s.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ { "type": "glossary", "title": "Plan S", - "definition": "Plan S is an initiative, launched in September 2018 by cOAlition S, a consortium of research funding organisations, which aims to accelerate the transition to full and immediate Open Access. Participating funders require recipients of research grants to publish their research in compliant Open Access journals or platforms, or make their work openly and immediately available in an Open Access repository, from 2021 onwards. cOAlition S funders have commited to not financially support ‘hybrid’ Open Access publication fees in subscription venues. However, authors can comply with plan S through publishing Open Access in a subscription journal under a “transformative arrangement” as further described in the implementation guidance. The “S” in Plan S stands for shock.", + "definition": "Plan S is an initiative, launched in September 2018 by cOAlition S, a consortium of research funding organisations, which aims to accelerate the transition to full and immediate Open Access. Participating funders require recipients of research grants to publish their research in compliant Open Access journals or platforms, or make their work openly and immediately available in an Open Access repository, from 2021 onwards. cOAlition S funders have committed to not financially support ‘hybrid’ Open Access publication fees in subscription venues. However, authors can comply with plan S through publishing Open Access in a subscription journal under a “transformative arrangement” as further described in the implementation guidance. The “S” in Plan S stands for shock.", "related_terms": [ "Open Access", "DORA", diff --git a/content/glossary/english/pro.md b/content/glossary/english/pro.md index 9bfce8695f8..d2b8958ebda 100644 --- a/content/glossary/english/pro.md +++ b/content/glossary/english/pro.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ { "type": "glossary", "title": "PRO (peer review openness) initiative", - "definition": "The agreement made by several academics that they will not provide a peer review of a manuscript unless certain conditions are met. Specifically, the manuscript authors should ensure the data and materials will be made publically available (or give a justification as to why they are not freely available or shared), provide documentation detailing how to interpret and run any files or code and detail where these files can be located via the manuscript itself.", + "definition": "The agreement made by several academics that they will not provide a peer review of a manuscript unless certain conditions are met. Specifically, the manuscript authors should ensure the data and materials will be made publicly available (or give a justification as to why they are not freely available or shared), provide documentation detailing how to interpret and run any files or code and detail where these files can be located via the manuscript itself.", "related_terms": [ "Non-anonymised peer review", "Open Science", diff --git a/content/glossary/english/research_protocol.md b/content/glossary/english/research_protocol.md index 003bd12986e..bd7830aaaf9 100644 --- a/content/glossary/english/research_protocol.md +++ b/content/glossary/english/research_protocol.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ { "type": "glossary", "title": "Research Protocol", - "definition": "A detailed document prepared before conducting a study, often written as part of ethics and funding applications. The protocol should include information relating to the background, rationale and aims of the study, as well as hypotheses which reflect the researchers’ expectations. The protocol should also provide a “recipe” for conducting the study, including methodological details and clear analysis plans. Best practice guidelines for creating a study protocol should be used for specific methodologies and fields. It is possible to publically share research protocols to attract new collaborators or facilitate efficient collaboration across labs (e.g. [https://www.protocols.io/](https://www.protocols.io/)). In medical and educational fields, protocols are often a separate article type suitable for publication in journals. Where protocol sharing or publication is not common practice, researchers can choose preregistration.", + "definition": "A detailed document prepared before conducting a study, often written as part of ethics and funding applications. The protocol should include information relating to the background, rationale and aims of the study, as well as hypotheses which reflect the researchers’ expectations. The protocol should also provide a “recipe” for conducting the study, including methodological details and clear analysis plans. Best practice guidelines for creating a study protocol should be used for specific methodologies and fields. It is possible to publicly share research protocols to attract new collaborators or facilitate efficient collaboration across labs (e.g. [https://www.protocols.io/](https://www.protocols.io/)). In medical and educational fields, protocols are often a separate article type suitable for publication in journals. Where protocol sharing or publication is not common practice, researchers can choose preregistration.", "related_terms": [ "Many Labs", "Preregistration" diff --git a/content/glossary/english/type_i_error.md b/content/glossary/english/type_i_error.md index 6f419935c2c..91793ad3e2e 100644 --- a/content/glossary/english/type_i_error.md +++ b/content/glossary/english/type_i_error.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ { "type": "glossary", "title": "Type I error", - "definition": "“Incorrect rejection of a null hypothesis” (Simmons et al., 2011, p. 1359), i.e. finding evidence to reject the null hypothesis that there is no effect when the evidence is actually in favouring of retaining the null that there is no effect (For example, a judge imprisoning an innocent person). Concluding that there is a significant effect and rejecting the null hypothesis when your findings actually occured by chance.", + "definition": "“Incorrect rejection of a null hypothesis” (Simmons et al., 2011, p. 1359), i.e. finding evidence to reject the null hypothesis that there is no effect when the evidence is actually in favouring of retaining the null that there is no effect (For example, a judge imprisoning an innocent person). Concluding that there is a significant effect and rejecting the null hypothesis when your findings actually occurred by chance.", "related_terms": [ "Frequentist statistics", "Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST)", diff --git a/content/glossary/references/index.md b/content/glossary/references/index.md index f1106bd69fb..587b4c00ccd 100644 --- a/content/glossary/references/index.md +++ b/content/glossary/references/index.md @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ We are currently working on a better way to display and cross-link the reference
Lewandowsky, S., & Oberauer, K. (2021). Worldview-motivated rejection of science and the norms of science. Cognition, 215, 104820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104820
-
Licenses & Standards | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/licenses
+
Licenses & Standards | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initiative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/licenses
Lin, D., Crabtree, J., Dillo, I., Downs, R. R., Edmunds, R., Giaretta, D., De Giusti, M., L’Hours, H., Hugo, W., Jenkyns, R., Khodiyar, V., Martone, M. E., Mokrane, M., Navale, V., Petters, J., Sierman, B., Sokolova, D. V., Stockhause, M., & Westbrook, J. (2020). The TRUST Principles for digital repositories. Scientific Data, 7(1), 144. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0486-7
@@ -991,7 +991,7 @@ We are currently working on a better way to display and cross-link the reference
The Open Definition—Open Definition—Defining Open in Open Data, Open Content and Open Knowledge. (n.d.). Open Knowledge Foundation. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opendefinition.org/
-
The Open Source Definition | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/osd
+
The Open Source Definition | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initiative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/osd
The Slow Science Academy. (2010). The Slow Science Manifesto. SLOW-SCIENCE.Org — Bear with Us, While We Think. http://slow-science.org/
diff --git a/content/glossary/vbeta/plan-s.md b/content/glossary/vbeta/plan-s.md index 1c408fa4716..5ad76a0d5da 100644 --- a/content/glossary/vbeta/plan-s.md +++ b/content/glossary/vbeta/plan-s.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ { "title": "Plan S", - "definition": "Plan S is an initiative, launched in September 2018 by cOAlition S, a consortium of research funding organisations, which aims to accelerate the transition to full and immediate Open Access. Participating funders require recipients of research grants to publish their research in compliant Open Access journals or platforms, or make their work openly and immediately available in an Open Access repository, from 2021 onwards. cOAlition S funders have commited to not financially support ‘hybrid’ Open Access publication fees in subscription venues. However, authors can comply with plan S through publishing Open Access in a subscription journal under a “transformative arrangement” as further described in the implementation guidance. The “S” in Plan S stands for shock.", + "definition": "Plan S is an initiative, launched in September 2018 by cOAlition S, a consortium of research funding organisations, which aims to accelerate the transition to full and immediate Open Access. Participating funders require recipients of research grants to publish their research in compliant Open Access journals or platforms, or make their work openly and immediately available in an Open Access repository, from 2021 onwards. cOAlition S funders have committed to not financially support ‘hybrid’ Open Access publication fees in subscription venues. However, authors can comply with plan S through publishing Open Access in a subscription journal under a “transformative arrangement” as further described in the implementation guidance. The “S” in Plan S stands for shock.", "related_terms": ["Open Access", "DORA", "Repository"], "references": ["https://www.coalition-s.org"], "alt_related_terms": [null], diff --git a/content/glossary/vbeta/pro-peer-review-openness-initiative.md b/content/glossary/vbeta/pro-peer-review-openness-initiative.md index a9dac82d160..0dd53542134 100644 --- a/content/glossary/vbeta/pro-peer-review-openness-initiative.md +++ b/content/glossary/vbeta/pro-peer-review-openness-initiative.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ { "title": "PRO (peer review openness) initiative", - "definition": "The agreement made by several academics that they will not provide a peer review of a manuscript unless certain conditions are met. Specifically, the manuscript authors should ensure the data and materials will be made publically available (or give a justification as to why they are not freely available or shared), provide documentation detailing how to interpret and run any files or code and detail where these files can be located via the manuscript itself.", + "definition": "The agreement made by several academics that they will not provide a peer review of a manuscript unless certain conditions are met. Specifically, the manuscript authors should ensure the data and materials will be made publicly available (or give a justification as to why they are not freely available or shared), provide documentation detailing how to interpret and run any files or code and detail where these files can be located via the manuscript itself.", "related_terms": ["Non-anonymised peer review", "Open Science", "Open Peer Review", "Transparent peer review"], "references": ["Morey et al. (2016)"], "alt_related_terms": [null], diff --git a/content/glossary/vbeta/references/index.md b/content/glossary/vbeta/references/index.md index 5368c1d8d96..624eb1f26ea 100644 --- a/content/glossary/vbeta/references/index.md +++ b/content/glossary/vbeta/references/index.md @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ We are currently working on a better way to display and cross-link the reference
Lewandowsky, S., & Oberauer, K. (2021). Worldview-motivated rejection of science and the norms of science. Cognition, 215, 104820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104820
-
Licenses & Standards | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/licenses
+
Licenses & Standards | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initiative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/licenses
Lin, D., Crabtree, J., Dillo, I., Downs, R. R., Edmunds, R., Giaretta, D., De Giusti, M., L’Hours, H., Hugo, W., Jenkyns, R., Khodiyar, V., Martone, M. E., Mokrane, M., Navale, V., Petters, J., Sierman, B., Sokolova, D. V., Stockhause, M., & Westbrook, J. (2020). The TRUST Principles for digital repositories. Scientific Data, 7(1), 144. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0486-7
@@ -991,7 +991,7 @@ We are currently working on a better way to display and cross-link the reference
The Open Definition—Open Definition—Defining Open in Open Data, Open Content and Open Knowledge. (n.d.). Open Knowledge Foundation. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opendefinition.org/
-
The Open Source Definition | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/osd
+
The Open Source Definition | Open Source Initiative. (n.d.). Open Source Initiative. Retrieved 9 July 2021, from https://opensource.org/osd
The Slow Science Academy. (2010). The Slow Science Manifesto. SLOW-SCIENCE.Org — Bear with Us, While We Think. http://slow-science.org/
diff --git a/content/glossary/vbeta/research-protocol.md b/content/glossary/vbeta/research-protocol.md index 8165e33ea64..f889ccc42a3 100644 --- a/content/glossary/vbeta/research-protocol.md +++ b/content/glossary/vbeta/research-protocol.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ { "title": "Research Protocol", - "definition": "A detailed document prepared before conducting a study, often written as part of ethics and funding applications. The protocol should include information relating to the background, rationale and aims of the study, as well as hypotheses which reflect the researchers’ expectations. The protocol should also provide a “recipe” for conducting the study, including methodological details and clear analysis plans. Best practice guidelines for creating a study protocol should be used for specific methodologies and fields. It is possible to publically share research protocols to attract new collaborators or facilitate efficient collaboration across labs (e.g. https://www.protocols.io/). In medical and educational fields, protocols are often a separate article type suitable for publication in journals. Where protocol sharing or publication is not common practice, researchers can choose preregistration.", + "definition": "A detailed document prepared before conducting a study, often written as part of ethics and funding applications. The protocol should include information relating to the background, rationale and aims of the study, as well as hypotheses which reflect the researchers’ expectations. The protocol should also provide a “recipe” for conducting the study, including methodological details and clear analysis plans. Best practice guidelines for creating a study protocol should be used for specific methodologies and fields. It is possible to publicly share research protocols to attract new collaborators or facilitate efficient collaboration across labs (e.g. https://www.protocols.io/). In medical and educational fields, protocols are often a separate article type suitable for publication in journals. Where protocol sharing or publication is not common practice, researchers can choose preregistration.", "related_terms": ["Many Labs", "Preregistration"], "references": ["BMJ (2015)", "Nosek et al. (2018)"], "alt_related_terms": [null], diff --git a/content/glossary/vbeta/type-i-error.md b/content/glossary/vbeta/type-i-error.md index 2cd5e9f7f7c..43988d07a9b 100644 --- a/content/glossary/vbeta/type-i-error.md +++ b/content/glossary/vbeta/type-i-error.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ { "title": "Type I error", - "definition": "“Incorrect rejection of a null hypothesis” (Simmons et al., 2011, p. 1359), i.e. finding evidence to reject the null hypothesis that there is no effect when the evidence is actually in favouring of retaining the null that there is no effect (For example, a judge imprisoning an innocent person). Concluding that there is a significant effect and rejecting the null hypothesis when your findings actually occured by chance.", + "definition": "“Incorrect rejection of a null hypothesis” (Simmons et al., 2011, p. 1359), i.e. finding evidence to reject the null hypothesis that there is no effect when the evidence is actually in favouring of retaining the null that there is no effect (For example, a judge imprisoning an innocent person). Concluding that there is a significant effect and rejecting the null hypothesis when your findings actually occurred by chance.", "related_terms": ["Frequentist statistics", "Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST)", "Null Result", "P value", "Questionable Research Practices or Questionable Reporting Practices (QRPs)", "Reproducibility crisis (aka Replicability or replication crisis)", "Scientific integrity", "Statistical power", "True positive result", "Type II error"], "references": ["Simmons et al., (2011)"], "alt_related_terms": [null], diff --git a/content/lesson-plans/nd-lessons-plans.md b/content/lesson-plans/nd-lessons-plans.md index e1a21f1dccb..81b4c14e341 100644 --- a/content/lesson-plans/nd-lessons-plans.md +++ b/content/lesson-plans/nd-lessons-plans.md @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ Please consider [giving us your feedback (critical or otherwise) when using thes ### Contribute --------------------- -You can still contribute to the collection of Lesson Plans by adding your ideas in the Google sheet below. Furthemore, if you would like your lesson plans to be included among the several others [in this OSF repository](https://osf.io/th254/), please use the [Lesson Plan's template](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OMyhKBUUceJHvZRJ0lNSclDXBcoYpQQDCn-zJ_2teXI/edit) and contact Madeleine Pownall or Flavio Azevedo at FORRT's slack channel. Or feel free to email [info@forrt.org](mailto:info@forrt.org). +You can still contribute to the collection of Lesson Plans by adding your ideas in the Google sheet below. Furthermore, if you would like your lesson plans to be included among the several others [in this OSF repository](https://osf.io/th254/), please use the [Lesson Plan's template](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OMyhKBUUceJHvZRJ0lNSclDXBcoYpQQDCn-zJ_2teXI/edit) and contact Madeleine Pownall or Flavio Azevedo at FORRT's slack channel. Or feel free to email [info@forrt.org](mailto:info@forrt.org). ### Pedagogical Activities diff --git a/content/neurodiversity-lessonbank/masterstools/index.md b/content/neurodiversity-lessonbank/masterstools/index.md index a9d0680fe95..11b06f85600 100644 --- a/content/neurodiversity-lessonbank/masterstools/index.md +++ b/content/neurodiversity-lessonbank/masterstools/index.md @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Jason, Leonard A.; Glantsman, Olya; O'Brien, Jack F.; and Ramian, Kaitlyn N., "I
- +

diff --git a/content/neurodiversity/neurodiversity.md b/content/neurodiversity/neurodiversity.md index 5c905402e22..bd293e45a36 100644 --- a/content/neurodiversity/neurodiversity.md +++ b/content/neurodiversity/neurodiversity.md @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ We are developing a lot of resources about neurodiversity in academia. Right now ### What is Neurodiversity? -A lack of diversity, equity and inclusion is bad for scholarship. Systemic barriers (such as hiding articles behind paywalls or geographical restrictions on conferences) prevent potential researchers with less access to resources from taking part in the research process. This limits the breadth of scientific progress, as a small and relatively homogenous group dictates which research questions are asked. Issues of diversity, equity and inclusion also arise within research which focuses on human research. A homogenous sample can lead to results which do not generalize across social groups - or worse, interventions which actively harm certain groups. So far, the majority of diversity, equity and inclusion work in open scholarship has focused on gender, ethnic/racial, and geographical disparities. However, issues linked to disability remain relatively under-discussed. At Team Neurodiversity, we hope to broaden these conversations to include and support the neurodiversity movement. +A lack of diversity, equity and inclusion is bad for scholarship. Systemic barriers (such as hiding articles behind paywalls or geographical restrictions on conferences) prevent potential researchers with less access to resources from taking part in the research process. This limits the breadth of scientific progress, as a small and relatively homogeneous group dictates which research questions are asked. Issues of diversity, equity and inclusion also arise within research which focuses on human research. A homogeneous sample can lead to results which do not generalize across social groups - or worse, interventions which actively harm certain groups. So far, the majority of diversity, equity and inclusion work in open scholarship has focused on gender, ethnic/racial, and geographical disparities. However, issues linked to disability remain relatively under-discussed. At Team Neurodiversity, we hope to broaden these conversations to include and support the neurodiversity movement. Neurodiversity refers to non-pathological variation in the human brain regarding movement, sociability, learning, attention, mood, and other mental functions at a group level (Singer, 2017). The neurological majority are known as neurotypical, while individuals who differ from this majority are referred to as neurodivergent. These differences can be present from birth (e.g. developmental or learning differences), or acquired during one’s life (e.g. due to an accident or medical condition such as a stroke). Neurodivergent individuals may have a diagnostic or identity label attached to their difference (such as autistic, ADHD or a mental health label), but this is not always the case. diff --git a/content/positive-changes-replication-crisis/positive-changes-replication-crisis.md b/content/positive-changes-replication-crisis/positive-changes-replication-crisis.md index 978d4ef1c36..2bc02843ca3 100644 --- a/content/positive-changes-replication-crisis/positive-changes-replication-crisis.md +++ b/content/positive-changes-replication-crisis/positive-changes-replication-crisis.md @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ Our educational toolkit is designed to support educators, researchers, and stude * **Prediction Markets:** These have been developed to assess the credibility of research findings, involving both experts and laypeople in predicting the replicability of studies. * **Statistical Assessment Tools:** Tools like p-curve and Z-curve are now used to detect biases in the literature. Additionally, tests like GRIM and SPRITE help identify inconsistencies in individual studies. * **Multiverse Analysis:** This approach involves testing hypotheses using various analytical methods to ensure the robustness of findings, reducing the influence of researchers' degrees of freedom. -* **Cummulative Science:** Adoption of best practices for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, including the use of guidelines like PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) to enhance transparency and reproducibility. This involves thorough documentation of methodological choices and comprehensive reporting of findings to minimize bias and improve the reliability of conclusions drawn from multiple studies. +* **Cumulative Science:** Adoption of best practices for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, including the use of guidelines like PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) to enhance transparency and reproducibility. This involves thorough documentation of methodological choices and comprehensive reporting of findings to minimize bias and improve the reliability of conclusions drawn from multiple studies. 3. **Community Changes:** diff --git a/content/replication-hub/fred_data_curators_role/index.md b/content/replication-hub/fred_data_curators_role/index.md index efea007b20a..1c3a3951ff2 100644 --- a/content/replication-hub/fred_data_curators_role/index.md +++ b/content/replication-hub/fred_data_curators_role/index.md @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ Find out if these studies meet the definition for replication, that is: Self-ide 1. > Magne, V. (2024). Replication research in the domain of perceived L2 fluency: Approximate and close replications of Kormos and Dénes (2004) and Rossiter (2009). Language Teaching, 1-9. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444824000120](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444824000120) -2. > Stephenson, Corinne (2024). Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Revising the Revisionists. A Replication Study of Autor, Katz, and Kearney (2008). Journal of Comments and Replications in Economics, Vol.3 (2024-4). [https://doi.org/10.18718/81781.34](https://doi.org/10.18718/81781.34) +2. > Stephenson, Corinne (2024). Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Revising the Revisionists. A Replication Study of Author, Katz, and Kearney (2008). Journal of Comments and Replications in Economics, Vol.3 (2024-4). [https://doi.org/10.18718/81781.34](https://doi.org/10.18718/81781.34) 3. > Huensch, A. (2024). Clarifying the role of inhibitory control in L2 phonological processing: A preregistered, close replication of Darcy et al.(2016). Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1-21. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263124000238](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263124000238) diff --git a/content/reversals/reversals.md b/content/reversals/reversals.md index 6005231cd3e..8d6b270ab48 100644 --- a/content/reversals/reversals.md +++ b/content/reversals/reversals.md @@ -960,7 +960,7 @@ You can find a list of all effects we are working on [here](https://docs.google. * Original paper: ‘[Body Politics: Power, Sex, and Nonverbal Communication](https://archive.org/details/bodypoliticspowe00henl)’, Henley 1977; book/theoretical and anecdotal evidence, n=NA. [citations=2284(GS, May 2023)]​. * Critiques: [Hall et al. 2005](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0033-2909.131.6.898) [meta-analysis, _k_=211, citations=1103(GS, May 2023)]. * Original effect size: NA. -* Replication effect size: Hall et al.: beliefs (perceptions) about the relation of verticality to nonverbal behavior (average _r_, weighted by sample size) – smiling _r_=-.25 [-.29, -.21], gazing _r_=.10 [.06, .14], raised brows _r_=-.36 [-.41, -.31], nodding _r_=.12 [.00, .18], self touch _r_=-.09 [-.24, -.06], other touch _r_=.21 [.17, .29], hand/arm gestures _r_=.37 [.25, .49], postural relaxation _r_=-.09 [-.04, .24], body/leg shifting _r_=.10 [-.29, -.21], interpersonal distance _r_=-.34 [-.43, -.25], facing orentation _r_=.10 [-.01, .21], vocal variability _r_=.24 [.16, .32], loudness _r_=.47 [.39, .55], interruptions _r_=.61 [.52, .70], pausing/latency to speak _r_=-.78 [-.94, -.62], rate of speech _r_=.09 [.03, .15], pitch _r_=-.10 [-.19, -.01], vocal relaxation _r_=.33 [.18, .48]; actual relations between verticality and nonverbal behavior (average _r_, weighted by sample size) – smiling _r_=-.03 [-.09, .03], gazing _r_=-.01 [-.09, .07], raised brows _r_=-.06 [-.25, .18], nodding _r_=.03 [-.05, .17], self touch _r_=-.04 [-.10, .10], other touch _r_=-.02 [-.10, .16], hand/arm gestures _r_=.05 [-.06, .10], openess _r_=.13 [.03, .23], postural relaxation _r_=.02 [-.08, .12], interpersonal distance _r_=-.17 [-.24, -.20], loudness _r_=.24 [.16, .32], interruptions _r_=.04 [-.02, .10], overlaps _r_=.06 [-.06, .81], pausing/latency to speak _r_=-.06 [-.24, .12], back-channel responses _r_=.03 [-.07, .13], speech errors _r_=.02 [-.10, .14], rate of speach _r_=-.06 [-.15, .03]. +* Replication effect size: Hall et al.: beliefs (perceptions) about the relation of verticality to nonverbal behavior (average _r_, weighted by sample size) – smiling _r_=-.25 [-.29, -.21], gazing _r_=.10 [.06, .14], raised brows _r_=-.36 [-.41, -.31], nodding _r_=.12 [.00, .18], self touch _r_=-.09 [-.24, -.06], other touch _r_=.21 [.17, .29], hand/arm gestures _r_=.37 [.25, .49], postural relaxation _r_=-.09 [-.04, .24], body/leg shifting _r_=.10 [-.29, -.21], interpersonal distance _r_=-.34 [-.43, -.25], facing orentation _r_=.10 [-.01, .21], vocal variability _r_=.24 [.16, .32], loudness _r_=.47 [.39, .55], interruptions _r_=.61 [.52, .70], pausing/latency to speak _r_=-.78 [-.94, -.62], rate of speech _r_=.09 [.03, .15], pitch _r_=-.10 [-.19, -.01], vocal relaxation _r_=.33 [.18, .48]; actual relations between verticality and nonverbal behavior (average _r_, weighted by sample size) – smiling _r_=-.03 [-.09, .03], gazing _r_=-.01 [-.09, .07], raised brows _r_=-.06 [-.25, .18], nodding _r_=.03 [-.05, .17], self touch _r_=-.04 [-.10, .10], other touch _r_=-.02 [-.10, .16], hand/arm gestures _r_=.05 [-.06, .10], openness _r_=.13 [.03, .23], postural relaxation _r_=.02 [-.08, .12], interpersonal distance _r_=-.17 [-.24, -.20], loudness _r_=.24 [.16, .32], interruptions _r_=.04 [-.02, .10], overlaps _r_=.06 [-.06, .81], pausing/latency to speak _r_=-.06 [-.24, .12], back-channel responses _r_=.03 [-.07, .13], speech errors _r_=.02 [-.10, .14], rate of speech _r_=-.06 [-.15, .03]. {{< /spoiler >}} * **Personal cognitive dissonance - free-choice paradigm**. Personal cognitive dissonance, from the cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957), suggests that an inconsistency between two cognitions (e.g., an attitude and a past behaviour) creates an unpleasant psychological state (i.e., personal dissonance) that the individual is motivated to reduce (e.g., by changing one of the elements to fit the other). This personal cognitive dissonance has been studied in the literature through different paradigms, including the following three main ones: free-choice, induced-compliance and induced-hypocrisy paradigm. The mere act of choosing equally desirable options can arouse dissonance in the individual, because choosing option A implies the rejection of option B (in other words, choosing option A means accepting its advantages but also its disadvantages, but also accepting to deprive oneself of the advantages of option B). In order to reduce dissonance, subjects will increase the perceived gap between options (i.e., spreading of alternatives) by overestimating the chosen option and/or underestimating the rejected option. ​ @@ -1527,7 +1527,7 @@ You can find a list of all effects we are working on [here](https://docs.google. * Status: replicated * Original paper: '[Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments](https://sci-hub.se/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121)', Dunning & Kruger 1999. This contains claims (1), (2), and (5) but no hint of (3) or (4) [n=334 undergrads, citations = 8376 (GS, September, 2022)]. * Critiques: [Gignac 2020](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300271), [n=929,citations = 53 (GS, September, 2022)]; [Nuhfer 2016](https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1188&context=numeracy) and [Nuhfer 2017](https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1215&context=numeracy), [n=1154, citations = 34 (GS, September, 2022)]; [Luu 2015](https://danluu.com/dunning-kruger); [Greenberg 2018](https://www.facebook.com/spencer.greenberg/posts/10104093568422862), n=534; [Yarkoni 2010](https://www.talyarkoni.org/blog/2010/07/07/what-the-dunning-kruger-effect-is-and-isnt/), [Jansen 2021](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01057-0) [2 studies, n=2000 each study, citations= 26 (GS, October2022)], [Muller 2020](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ejn.14935) [n= 56, citations= 20 (GS, October 2022)] -* Original effect size: not reported. Study 1 on humor (n= 15): difference between the actual and estimated performance of “incompetent” (bottom quartile) participants _d_= 2.58 [calculated], while for “competent” (top quartile) participants _d_= -0.55 [calculated]. Study 2 on logical reasoning ( n= 45): difference between the actual and estimated performance of “incompetent” (bottom quartile) participants _d_= 5.44 (percieved logical reasoning ability) [calculated], _d_= 3.48 (test performance) [calculated], while for “competent” (top quartile) participants _d_= -1.12 [calculated], _d_= -0.79 (percieved test performance) [calculated]. Study 3 on grammar (n= 84): difference between the actual and estimated performance of “incompetent” (percieved bottom quartile) participants _d_= 3.42 (percieved ability) [calculated], _d_= 3.94 (percieved test performance) [calculated], while for “competent” (top quartile) participants _d_= -1.18 (percieved ability) [calculated], _d_= -1.27 (perceived test performance) [calculated]. +* Original effect size: not reported. Study 1 on humor (n= 15): difference between the actual and estimated performance of “incompetent” (bottom quartile) participants _d_= 2.58 [calculated], while for “competent” (top quartile) participants _d_= -0.55 [calculated]. Study 2 on logical reasoning ( n= 45): difference between the actual and estimated performance of “incompetent” (bottom quartile) participants _d_= 5.44 (perceived logical reasoning ability) [calculated], _d_= 3.48 (test performance) [calculated], while for “competent” (top quartile) participants _d_= -1.12 [calculated], _d_= -0.79 (perceived test performance) [calculated]. Study 3 on grammar (n= 84): difference between the actual and estimated performance of “incompetent” (perceived bottom quartile) participants _d_= 3.42 (perceived ability) [calculated], _d_= 3.94 (perceived test performance) [calculated], while for “competent” (top quartile) participants _d_= -1.18 (perceived ability) [calculated], _d_= -1.27 (perceived test performance) [calculated]. * Replication effect size: Gignac 2020 (for IQ): when using statistical analysis as in Dunning & Kruger 1999 _η2_ = 0.20, but running two less-confounded tests, _r_= −0.05/d= -0.1 [[calculated](https://www.escal.site/)] between P and errors , and _r_= 0.02/_d_= 0.04 [[calculated](https://www.escal.site/)] for a quadratic relationship between self-described performance and actual performance. [Jansen 2021](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01057-0) (for grammar and logical reasoning): not reported (Bayesian models support the existence of the effect in the data and replicate claim 1). [Muller 2020](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejn.14935) (for recognition memory): the difference between the actual and estimated performance of “incompetent” (bottom quartile) participants _d_= 4.73 [calculated], while for “competent” (top quartile) participants _d_= -0.88 [calculated]. {{< /spoiler >}} @@ -1859,7 +1859,7 @@ You can find a list of all effects we are working on [here](https://docs.google. * Original paper: ‘[Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology](https://archive.org/details/memorycontributi00ebbiuoft/page/80/mode/2up?view=theater)’, Ebbinghaus 1964; series of single-case studies, n=1. [citations=6103 (GS, September, 2022)]. * Critiques: [Cepeda et al. 2006](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0033-2909.132.3.354), meta-analysis [n= 184 articles, citations=1894 (GS, September 2022)]. [Janiszewski et al. 2003](https://academic.oup.com/jcr/article-abstract/30/1/138/1801740?login=false), meta-analysis [n= 97 verbal learning studies, citations= 373 (GS, September 2022)]. * Original effect size: N/A. -* Replication effect size: Cepeda et al.: Cohen’s _d_ for the difference in the accuracy between massed and spaced learning trials in verbal recall tasks= 0.567 (calculated). Janiszewski et al.: _ηp2_= 0.093 (calculated from the reported _F_(1, 478)=49.23,_p_<.01 using this[ conversion](https://haiyangjin.github.io/2020/05/eta2d/#from-cohens-d-to-partial-eta-squared)) for a linear relationship between the number of lags between learning events and the accuracy of recall; _ηp2_= 0.051 for the log relationship (calculated fomr the reported _F_(1, 478)=25.69, _p_<.01 using this[ conversion](https://haiyangjin.github.io/2020/05/eta2d/#from-cohens-d-to-partial-eta-squared)). +* Replication effect size: Cepeda et al.: Cohen’s _d_ for the difference in the accuracy between massed and spaced learning trials in verbal recall tasks= 0.567 (calculated). Janiszewski et al.: _ηp2_= 0.093 (calculated from the reported _F_(1, 478)=49.23,_p_<.01 using this[ conversion](https://haiyangjin.github.io/2020/05/eta2d/#from-cohens-d-to-partial-eta-squared)) for a linear relationship between the number of lags between learning events and the accuracy of recall; _ηp2_= 0.051 for the log relationship (calculated from the reported _F_(1, 478)=25.69, _p_<.01 using this[ conversion](https://haiyangjin.github.io/2020/05/eta2d/#from-cohens-d-to-partial-eta-squared)). {{< /spoiler >}} * **False memories - eyewitness testimony**. A phenomenon of recalling a real event that differs from what actually happened or an event that never occurred. @@ -2274,7 +2274,7 @@ You can find a list of all effects we are working on [here](https://docs.google. {{< spoiler text="Statistics" >}} * Status: mixed * Original paper: ‘[Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought‐action repertoire](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02699930441000238)s’, Fredrickson and Branigan, 2005; between-subjects design, n=104. [citations=5037 (GS, March 2023)]. -* Critiques: [Bruyneel et al. 2013 ](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-012-0432-1)[Exp 1: n=35, Exp 2: n=38, Exp 3: n=25, citations=83 (GS, March 2023)]. [Huntsinger 2013](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0963721413480364) [review, citations=137 (GS, March 2023)]. [Huntsinger et al. 2010](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=89e9f47cbe4019e86ac43ee196e18f36a0cef6f6) [Exp 1: n=62, Exp 2: n=72, citations=160 (GS, March 2023)]. +* Critiques: [Bruyneel et al. 2013 ](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-012-0432-1)[Exp 1: n=35, Exp 2: n=38, Exp 3: n=25, citations=83 (GS, March 2023)]. [Huntsinger 2013](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0963721413480364) [review, citations=137 (GS, March 2023)]. [Huntsinger et al. 2010](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?rapid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=89e9f47cbe4019e86ac43ee196e18f36a0cef6f6) [Exp 1: n=62, Exp 2: n=72, citations=160 (GS, March 2023)]. * Original effect size: _d_ = 0.375 (calculated by using[ this calculator](https://lbecker.uccs.edu/)). * Replication effect size: Bruyneel et al.: Across three experiments, positive affect consistently failed to exert any impact on selective attention, Exp 1: _ηp2 _= 0.04, Exp 2: _ηp2 _= 0.001, Exp 3: _ηp2 _= 0.01 (null effects). Huntsinger: Rather than having fixed effects on the scope of attention, the impact of positive and negative affect is surprisingly flexible. Huntsinger et al.: Positive affect empowers whatever focus is momentarily dominant, Exp 1: _d_= 0.58, Exp 2: _d_= 0.71. {{< /spoiler >}} @@ -2285,7 +2285,7 @@ You can find a list of all effects we are working on [here](https://docs.google. * Original paper: ‘[Interactions between cognition and emotion during response inhibition’,](https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0024109) Pessoa et al. 2012; within-subjects design, n=36. [citations=245 (GS, March 2023)]. * Critiques: [Pandey and Gupta 2022](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19116-5) [n=54, citations=3 (GS, March 2023)]. [Williams et al. 2020 ](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02699931.2020.1793303)[Study 1: n=40, Study 2: n=40, Study 3: n=42 (only younger adults sample), citations=12 (GS, March 2023)]. * Original effect size: _η2_= 0.17, _d_= 0.44 (fearful vs neutral), _d_= 0.33 (happy vs neutral) (Calculated using[ this](https://lbecker.uccs.edu/) calculator). -* Replication effect size: [Pandey and Gupta: ](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19116-5)Angry faces as stop signal impaired response inhibition compared to happy faces,[ _d_ = 0.35](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=89e9f47cbe4019e86ac43ee196e18f36a0cef6f6). Williams et al.[: ](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=89e9f47cbe4019e86ac43ee196e18f36a0cef6f6)Fearful faces impaired response inhibition compared to happy faces, Study 1: _d_= 0.03 (fearful vs neutral), _d_= 0.04 (happy vs neutral), _d_ = 0.08 (fearful vs happy), Study 2: _d_= 0.11 (fearful vs neutral), _d_= 0.04 (happy vs neutral), _d_= 0.15 (fearful vs happy), Study 3: _d_= 0.56 (fearful vs neutral), _d_= 0.04 (happy vs neutral), _d_= 0.58 (fearful vs happy). +* Replication effect size: [Pandey and Gupta: ](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19116-5)Angry faces as stop signal impaired response inhibition compared to happy faces,[ _d_ = 0.35](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?rapid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=89e9f47cbe4019e86ac43ee196e18f36a0cef6f6). Williams et al.[: ](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?rapid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=89e9f47cbe4019e86ac43ee196e18f36a0cef6f6)Fearful faces impaired response inhibition compared to happy faces, Study 1: _d_= 0.03 (fearful vs neutral), _d_= 0.04 (happy vs neutral), _d_ = 0.08 (fearful vs happy), Study 2: _d_= 0.11 (fearful vs neutral), _d_= 0.04 (happy vs neutral), _d_= 0.15 (fearful vs happy), Study 3: _d_= 0.56 (fearful vs neutral), _d_= 0.04 (happy vs neutral), _d_= 0.58 (fearful vs happy). {{< /spoiler >}} @@ -3782,7 +3782,7 @@ Critiques: [Gelman and Loken 2013](http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research {{< spoiler text="Statistics" >}} * Status: mixed * Original paper: ‘[Use of experimenter-given cues during object-choice tasks by capuchin monkeys](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0003347295801685)’, Anderson et al. 1995; experimental design, 3 cue conditions, n = 3. [citations = 250 (GS, June 2023)]. -* Critiques: [Anderson et al. 1996](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0376635795000747) [n = 3, citations = 188 (GS, June 2023)]. [Emery et al. 1997](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=17e1ccd8923068932dcb51e26ba79c7b45858bbd) [n =2, citations = 354 (GS, June 2023)]. +* Critiques: [Anderson et al. 1996](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0376635795000747) [n = 3, citations = 188 (GS, June 2023)]. [Emery et al. 1997](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?rapid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=17e1ccd8923068932dcb51e26ba79c7b45858bbd) [n =2, citations = 354 (GS, June 2023)]. * Original effect size: NA. * Replication effect size: Anderson et al.: not reported. Emery et al.: not reported. {{< /spoiler >}} diff --git a/content/summaries/summaries.py b/content/summaries/summaries.py index 5ddb9897037..34cd2e06fa1 100755 --- a/content/summaries/summaries.py +++ b/content/summaries/summaries.py @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ d["summary_{0}".format(i)].update(interest) # else: # d["summary_{0}".format(i)].append(x.content) - elif x == item: # breking the loop when encoutering a new summary + elif x == item: # breking the loop when encountering a new summary # print('passing because', x==item, x, item) break del d['summary_0'] diff --git a/scripts/spell_check/README.md b/scripts/spell_check/README.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..c8fe44b5fa1 --- /dev/null +++ b/scripts/spell_check/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ +# FORRT Spell Check + +This directory contains the automated spell-checking system for the FORRT repository. + +## Components + +### check_spelling.py +Python script that: +- Runs codespell on the repository +- Parses the results +- Formats them as a GitHub comment for PRs + +### Configuration Files (in repository root) + +#### .codespellrc +Configuration file for codespell that: +- Specifies which files/directories to skip +- Configures checking options +- References the ignore words list + +#### .codespell-ignore.txt +List of words to ignore during spell checking: +- Project-specific terms (FORRT, preregistration, etc.) +- Proper names (authors, organizations) +- Technical terms +- Acceptable spelling variations (e.g., British English "behaviour", "colour" are acceptable alongside American English variants) + +## Usage + +### Running Locally + +To run spell check locally: + +```bash +# Install codespell +pip install codespell + +# Run the spell check +python scripts/spell_check/check_spelling.py +``` + +Or run codespell directly: + +```bash +codespell --config .codespellrc +``` + +### Adding Words to Whitelist + +If codespell flags a word that is correct (e.g., a person's name, technical term, or intentional spelling): + +1. Add the word to `.codespell-ignore.txt` +2. One word per line +3. Add a comment above the word explaining why it's whitelisted (optional but recommended) +4. Commit the change + +Example: +``` +# Author names +Kathawalla +Gilad +``` + +### GitHub Actions Workflow + +The spell check runs automatically on pull requests via the `.github/workflows/spell-check.yaml` workflow. It: + +1. Triggers on PR open, synchronize, or reopen +2. Installs codespell +3. Runs the spell check script +4. Posts/updates a comment on the PR with results + +## False Positives + +If you encounter false positives: + +1. **For legitimate terms**: Add to `.codespell-ignore.txt` +2. **For file types**: Add the extension to the `skip` list in `.codespellrc` +3. **For directories**: Add the directory path to the `skip` list in `.codespellrc` + +## Configuration + +The spell check focuses on: +- Content files (markdown) +- Scripts (Python, shell) +- GitHub workflows +- Documentation files + +It skips: +- Binary files (images, fonts) +- Themes and node_modules +- Non-English translations +- Data files (JSON, PDF) +- Lock files diff --git a/scripts/spell_check/check_spelling.py b/scripts/spell_check/check_spelling.py new file mode 100755 index 00000000000..5bfe8e7967f --- /dev/null +++ b/scripts/spell_check/check_spelling.py @@ -0,0 +1,132 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env python3 +""" +Spell-check script for FORRT repository using codespell. +Checks for typos in pull requests and generates a formatted comment. +""" + +import os +import sys +import subprocess +import json +from pathlib import Path + +def run_codespell(): + """Run codespell and capture output.""" + try: + # Run codespell on specific directories to avoid themes and other large dirs + # Focus on content, scripts, and GitHub workflows + paths = ['content', 'scripts', '.github', 'CONTRIBUTING.md', 'README.md'] + + result = subprocess.run( + ['codespell', '--config', '.codespellrc'] + paths, + cwd='/home/runner/work/forrtproject.github.io/forrtproject.github.io', + capture_output=True, + text=True + ) + + return result.stdout, result.returncode + except FileNotFoundError: + print("Error: codespell is not installed.", file=sys.stderr) + sys.exit(1) + except Exception as e: + print(f"Error running codespell: {e}", file=sys.stderr) + sys.exit(1) + +def parse_codespell_output(output): + """Parse codespell output into structured format.""" + typos = [] + + if not output.strip(): + return typos + + lines = output.strip().split('\n') + for line in lines: + if ':' in line: + # Format: filename:line: TYPO ==> SUGGESTION + parts = line.split(':', 2) + if len(parts) >= 3: + filepath = parts[0].strip() + line_num = parts[1].strip() + message = parts[2].strip() + + typos.append({ + 'file': filepath, + 'line': line_num, + 'message': message + }) + + return typos + +def format_comment(typos): + """Format typos as a GitHub comment.""" + if not typos: + comment = "## ✅ Spell Check Passed\n\n" + comment += "No spelling issues found in this PR! 🎉" + return comment + + comment = "## 📝 Spell Check Results\n\n" + comment += f"Found {len(typos)} potential spelling issue(s) in this PR:\n\n" + + # Group typos by file + typos_by_file = {} + for typo in typos: + file = typo['file'] + if file not in typos_by_file: + typos_by_file[file] = [] + typos_by_file[file].append(typo) + + # Format output + for file, file_typos in sorted(typos_by_file.items()): + comment += f"### 📄 `{file}`\n\n" + comment += "| Line | Issue |\n" + comment += "|------|-------|\n" + for typo in file_typos: + line = typo['line'] + message = typo['message'].replace('|', '\\|') # Escape pipes for markdown + comment += f"| {line} | {message} |\n" + comment += "\n" + + comment += "---\n\n" + comment += "### ℹ️ How to address these issues:\n\n" + comment += "1. **Fix the typo**: If it's a genuine typo, please correct it.\n" + comment += "2. **Add to whitelist**: If it's a valid word (e.g., a name, technical term), add it to `.codespell-ignore.txt`\n" + comment += "3. **False positive**: If this is a false positive, please report it in the PR comments.\n\n" + comment += "🤖 This check was performed by [codespell](https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell)" + + return comment + +def main(): + """Main function to run spell check and output comment.""" + print("Running spell check...", file=sys.stderr) + + # Run codespell + output, returncode = run_codespell() + + # Parse output + typos = parse_codespell_output(output) + + # Format comment + comment = format_comment(typos) + + # Output comment for GitHub Actions + # Escape special characters for GitHub Actions output + comment_escaped = comment.replace('%', '%25').replace('\n', '%0A').replace('\r', '%0D') + + # Set output using environment file (GitHub Actions recommended method) + github_output = os.environ.get('GITHUB_OUTPUT') + if github_output: + with open(github_output, 'a') as f: + f.write(f"comment<