BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Research on Research - ECPv6.9.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Research on Research
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://researchonresearch.org
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Research on Research
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:UTC
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:UTC
DTSTART:20240101T000000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20241002T160000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20241002T173000
DTSTAMP:20250708T065502
CREATED:20250117T110206Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110759Z
UID:2137-1727884800-1727890200@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Advancing Open Research through Metascience
DESCRIPTION:This ICOR meeting focused on the growing significance of metascience for improving scientific research. As metascience becomes a recognised practice for evaluating scientific evidence and identifying potential biases\, it’s important for stakeholders from different regions to collaborate on metascience projects and share expertise and resources that address common challenges. A unified approach to metascience can provide the mechanisms to help us learn from what we are doing and establish a continuous improvement cycle for implementing innovations in how science is performed. It will also provide trusted information to governments and policy makers to make more informed and evidence-based choices. \n\n\n\nThis meeting hosted four talks that provided real-life examples of the increasing influence of metascience as a systematic approach to understanding the practices\, processes\, and challenges across the academic research ecosystem. \n\n\n\nThe meeting sparked much conversation and what came across clearly is that metascience as a field is becoming a mainstay in understanding how to perform and evaluate research. We are now at an inflection point where metascience actors and enthusiasts are actively coalescing to ensure global participation and creating open spaces to collaborate and learn from each other. \n\n\n\nMetascience for Reforming Research Assessment: an Indian Perspective\n\n\n\nMoumita Koley\, DST- Centre for Policy Research\, Indian Institute of Science [slides; streaming video 3-21 min] \n\n\n\nMoumita described her work that focuses on generating evidence and advocating for change to research assessment in India. Her work is a part of project AGORRA\, a global observatory of responsible research assessment that generates comparative data\, evidence and analysis to support and accelerate change across national assessment systems. Moumita provided a detailed overview of the Indian context where quantitative metrics play the dominant role in research assessment. She then shared two case studies\, the first on the misalignment between research outputs and disease burden in health research\, and the second on evaluating the parameters used by the Indian National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) to understand if they promoted a publish or perish culture and the consequences that has had on Indian research practices. \n\n\n\nAdvancing open science through metascience\n\n\n\nJames Wilsdon\, Research on Research Institute (RORI) [slides; streaming video 21-44 mins] \n\n\n\nJames started off by letting us know RORI had recently celebrated its 5th birthday and described how RORI’s mission to accelerate transformative research on research systems\, cultures\, and decision-making has evolved over time. James explained how the current set-up of the RORI team enables them to co-design and deliver projects that can respond quickly to strategic dilemmas and opportunities that partners identify\, or are rising up in wider policy and scientific agendas. James then went on to highlight the newly formed UK metascience unit that aims to formalise the practice of using scientific methodology to study how research is done at the national level. James finished by showing how the global metascience community has grown and matured over time and that the next major gathering for the field will be in London at the Metascience 2025 conference (and welcomed the community’s participation). \n\n\n\nThe Metascience Alliance\n\n\n\nBrian Nosek\, Center for Open Science (COS) [slides; streaming video 44-65 mins] \n\n\n\nBrian’s presentation built upon the gaining popularity of metascience and explained that metascience-engaged groups have distinct and complementary interests\, which spurred on the idea to create the Metascience Alliance. The Metascience Alliance aims to be a trusted third party for metascience aligned and interested organizations and individuals with three primary objectives; community building\, workforce development and matchmaking. Brian explained the initial vision is to create a light coordination to better foster collaboration\, however the overall make-up and direction of the Metascience Alliance is still under scope. There is currently a process underway to assign a contractor as a Founding Program Manager for a 2 year pilot to get the ball rolling and start broader outreach and engagement with metascience stakeholders. More public information will be available soon\, but if you are interested in finding out more now then feel free to reach out to Brian. \n\n\n\nStudying Aligning Sciences Across Parkinson’s (ASAP)\n\n\n\nKristen Ratan\, Incentivising Collaborative and Open Research (ICOR) [slides; streaming video 65-82 mins] \n\n\n\nKristen’s presentation focus on ICOR’s work with Aligning Sciences Across Parkinson’s (ASAP) and how ICOR is now in a position to study the impact of ASAP’s Collaborative Research Network (CRN) and open science principles that were implemented in 2021. To do this ICOR have enlisted the University of Virginia’s metascience team\, led by Alex Gates\, to study data and ask questions that will help ASAP make decisions on their own policies but also provide real-world evidence for other funders and institutions looking to implement similar policies and practices. The study intends to answer important questions around the process and impact of implementing open science policies\, the engagement of the CRN with open and collaborative research\, and changes in researcher behaviour over time. ICOR will endeavour to share the results of this project as the work progresses.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/advancing-open-research-through-metascience/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/matrix-abstract-electronic-brain-open-science-scaled-e1737734852313.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20241111T130000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20241111T143000
DTSTAMP:20250708T065502
CREATED:20250117T110100Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110759Z
UID:2136-1731330000-1731335400@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Using Natural Language Processing (NLP) in classification of Social Sciences and Humanities research and societal impact
DESCRIPTION:The European Network for Research Evaluation in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (ENRESSH) in partnership with the Research on Research Institute (RoRI) is proud to present the next webinar in its series on research evaluation as it is practiced across disciplines and countries. \n\n\n\nWe are opening a new thematic line on AI in research assessment with the presentation of two classification exercises using Natural Language Processing (NLP). \n\n\n\nMODERATORSpecial advisor Dr Jon Holm\, Research Council of Norway \n\n\n\nSPEAKERSTopic modeling of SSH publications from the VABB publication databaseSenior researcher Dr Raf Guns\, Flemish Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM)\, Antwerp University \n\n\n\nClassifying REF impact cases by user groups – a lexical approachProfessor Andrea Bonaccorsi\, Economics and Management at the School of Engineering of the University of Pisa \n\n\n\nRESPONDENTDr Denis Newman-Griffis Lecturer in Data Science\, University of Sheffield\, and a Research Fellow of the Research on Research Institute \n\n\n\nSPEAKERS\n\n\n\nRaf Guns (he) is a senior researcher at the University of Antwerp\, where he coordinates the Antwerp branch of the Flemish Centre for Research & Development Monitoring (ECOOM). His research focuses on quantitative science studies\, addressing topics like interdisciplinarity\, open science\, and the characteristics of the social sciences and humanities. \n\n\n\nAndrea Bonaccorsi (he) is a Professor of Economics and Management at the School of Engineering of the University of Pisa. His main areas of research are economics of science and innovation. With more than 200 works\, he is listed in the top 2% of world scientists. \n\n\n\nDenis Newman-Griffis(they/them) is a Lecturer in Data Science at the University of Sheffield\, a Research Fellow of the Research on Research Institute\, and a British Academy Innovation Fellow. Their research investigates the principles and practices of Responsible AI\, focusing on health and disability as well as public sector governance. They lead the Research on Research Institute’s GRAIL project on Responsible AI and Machine Learning for research funding and evaluation\, and they are an active participant in Responsible AI policy discussions in research\, education\, and government. \n\n\n\nRegister on Eventbrite.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/using-natural-language-processing-nlp-in-classification-of-social-sciences-and-humanities-research-and-societal-impact/
CATEGORIES:Online,Research Evaluation
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/natural-language-processing-spiral-of-letters-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20250319T150000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20250319T160000
DTSTAMP:20250708T065502
CREATED:20250217T152217Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250217T152451Z
UID:2209-1742396400-1742400000@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Do Grant Proposal Texts Matter for Funding Decisions? A Field Experiment
DESCRIPTION:19 March 2025 08:00 PDT  / 15:00 GMT / 16:00 CET \n\n\n\nScientists and funding agencies invest considerable resources in writing and evaluating grant proposals. But do grant proposal texts noticeably change panel decisions in single blind review? \n\n\n\nWe report on a field experiment conducted by The Dutch Research Council (NWO) in collaboration with the authors in an early-career competition for awards of 800\,000 euros of research funding. A random half of panelists were shown a CV and only a one-paragraph summary of the proposed research\, while the other half were shown a CV and a full proposal. We find that withholding proposal texts from panelists did not detectibly impact their proposal rankings. This result suggests that the resources devoted to writing and evaluating grant proposals may not have their intended effect of facilitating the selection of the most promising science. \n\n\n\n \n\n\n\nAbout the Speaker\n\n\n\n\nMüge Simsek is an Assistant Professor of Sociology in the programme group Institutions\, Inequalities and Life Courses at the University of Amsterdam. She earned her PhD from Utrecht University in 2019 and completed postdoctoral research at both Utrecht University and the Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute. Prior to her current role\, she worked as a lecturer at University College Groningen. Her research centers on the integration processes of immigrants and their offspring\, with a particular emphasis on the role of religion. In parallel\, she maintains a secondary research agenda focused on the organization of science and inequality within academia.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/do-grant-proposal-texts-matter-for-funding-decisions-a-field-experiment/
CATEGORIES:Experiments
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/pexels-pixabay-87611-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=UTC:20250630T080000
DTEND;TZID=UTC:20250707T170000
DTSTAMP:20250708T065502
CREATED:20250117T105614Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250128T110758Z
UID:2135-1751270400-1751907600@researchonresearch.org
SUMMARY:Metascience 2025 Conference
DESCRIPTION:Save the Date: \n\n\n\nJune 30 – July 2\, 2025University College London\n\n\n\nAbout \n\n\n\nMany scholarly fields conduct descriptive research about the research process. Advocates and reformers have prescriptive ideas about how the research process might be improved. Policymakers\, funders\, publishers\, and other stakeholders enact changes to the social and technical infrastructure of research. All have an interest in whether changes and reforms have their intended effects or unintended consequences that might accelerate or inhibit advancement\, translation\, and application of research. Together\, these researchers and stakeholders are the research and development pipeline for improving the system and practice of research. The Metascience 2025 Conference will bring these communities together to share ideas\, evidence\, and foster a culture of continuous experimentation and improvement. \n\n\n\nThe Center for Open Science and the Research on Research Institute have partnered to bring the Metascience Conference to London! \n\n\n\nMetascience 2025 will occur in London’s Knowledge Quarter\, with a unique and rich mix of research\, scientific\, and cultural partners\, facilities\, and opportunities centered on a half-mile stretch of London’s Euston Road. RoRI\, based at University College London (UCL)\, will be the lead local coordinating body for a collaborative effort by a consortium of London-based scientific and research institutions.
URL:https://researchonresearch.org/event/metascience-2025-conference/
CATEGORIES:2025
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://researchonresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/metascience.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR