Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T05:51:13.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Research Openness in Canadian Political Science: Toward an Inclusive and Differentiated Discussion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2017

Genevieve Fuji Johnson ,
Mark Pickup ,
Eline A. de Rooij  and
Rémi Léger
Genevieve Fuji Johnson*
Affiliation:
Simon Fraser University
Mark Pickup*
Affiliation:
Simon Fraser University
Eline A. de Rooij*
Affiliation:
Simon Fraser University
Rémi Léger*
Affiliation:
Simon Fraser University
*
Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, email: gfjohnso@sfu.ca
Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, email: mark.pickup@sfu.ca
Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, email: eline_de_rooij@sfu.ca
Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, email: remi_leger@sfu.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we initiate a discussion within the Canadian political science community about research openness and its implications for our discipline. This discussion is important because the Tri-Agency has recently released guidelines on data management and because a number of political science journals, from several subfields, have signed the Journal Editors’ Transparency Statement requiring data access and research transparency (DA-RT). As norms regarding research openness develop, an increasing number and range of journals and funding agencies may begin to implement DA-RT-type requirements. If Canadian political scientists wish to continue to participate in the global political science community, we must take careful note of and be proactive participants in the ongoing developments concerning research openness.

Résumé

Dans cet article nous amorçons une discussion au sein de la communauté canadienne de science politique sur l'ouverture de la recherche et ses incidences pour notre discipline. Cette discussion est importante en raison de la publication récente des lignes directrices sur la gestion des données par les trois organismes ainsi que de la déclaration souscrite par plusieurs journaux de science politique, dans plusieurs sous-domaines, prônant l'accessibilité des données et la transparence en recherche (DA-RT). À mesure que les normes concernant les pratiques d'ouverture s’élaborent, un éventail et un nombre croissant de revues spécialisées et d'organismes de financement de la recherche peuvent commencer à mettre en œuvre des exigences de type DA-RT. Si les politologues canadiens souhaitent continuer à faire partie de la communauté mondiale de science politique, il convient de prendre soigneusement note des évolutions en cours concernant l'ouverture de la recherche et en être des participants proactifs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 311 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Political Science Association (APSA). 2012. A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science. 2nd ed. http://www.apsanet.org/portals/54/Files/Publications/APSAEthicsGuide2012.pdf (September 12, 2016).Google Scholar
Bleich, Erik and Pekkanen, Robert J.. 2015. “Data Access, Research Transparency, and Interviews: The Interview Methods Appendix.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 8–12.Google Scholar
Büthe, Tim and Jacobs, Alan M., eds. 2015a. Qualitative & Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 13 (1).Google Scholar
Büthe, Tim and Jacobs, Alan M.. 2015b. “Introduction to the Symposium.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 2–7.Google Scholar
Büthe, Tim and Jacobs, Alan M.. 2015c. “Conclusion: Research Transparency for a Diverse Discipline.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 52–62.Google Scholar
Canadian Political Science Association Diversity Task Force. 2012. Report and Analysis of the Canadian Political Science Association Member Survey. https://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/documents/pdfs/diversity/2012_Diversity_Task_Force_Report.pdf (May 2012).Google Scholar
Carens, Joseph. 2000. Culture, Citizenship, and Community: A Contextual Exploration of Justice as Evenhandedness. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carsey, Thomas M. 2014. “Making DA-RT a Reality.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 72–77.Google Scholar
Cramer, Katherine. 2015. “Transparent Explanations, Yes. Public Transcripts and Fieldnotes, No: Ethnographic Research on Public Opinion.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 15 (1): 17–20.Google Scholar
Dafoe, Allan. 2014. “Science Deserve Better: The Imperative to Share Complete Replication Files.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 60–66.Google Scholar
Data Access and Research Transparency (DA-RT). http://www.dartstatement.org (June 2015).Google Scholar
Data Access and Research Transparency (DA-RT). “Events.” http://www.dartstatement.org/events (June 2015).Google Scholar
Elman, Colin and Kapiszewski, Diana. 2014. “Data Access and Research Transparency in the Qualitative Tradition.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 43–47.Google Scholar
European Union. 2016. “Open Access & Data Management.” In Horizon 2020 Online Manual. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/docs/h2020-funding-guide/cross-cutting-issues/open-access-dissemination_en.htm (December 7, 2016).Google Scholar
Flaherty, Colleen. 2015. “More Time on Transparency.” Inside Higher ED. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/11/16/political-scientists-seek-delay-transparency-standards-publications (November 16, 2015).Google Scholar
Fujii, Lee Ann. 2016. “The Dark Side of DA-RT.” Comparative Politics Newsletter 26 (1): 25–27.Google Scholar
Golder, Matt and Golder, Sona N., eds. 2016a. Comparative Politics Newsletter: The Organized Section in Comparative Politics of the American Political Science Association 26 (1).Google Scholar
Golder, Matt and Golder, Sona N.. 2016b. “Letter from the Editors.” Comparative Politics Newsletter 26 (1): 1–9.Google Scholar
Gordin, Michael. 2015. Scientific Babel: How Science Was Done Before and After Global English. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Peter A. 2016. “Transparency, Research Integrity, and Multiple Methods.” Comparative Politics Newsletter 26 (1): 28–31.Google Scholar
Hochschild, Jennifer, Lake, David A. and Hero, Rodney E.. 2015. “Data Access and Research Transparency Initiative (DA-RT).” PS Now. http://www.politicalsciencenow.com/data-access-and-research-transparency-initiative-da-rt/ (September 6, 2016).Google Scholar
Htun, Mala. 2016. “DA-RT and the Social Conditions of Knowledge Production in Political Science.” Comparative Politics Newsletter 26 (1): 32–35.Google Scholar
Humphreys, Macartan, Sanchez de la Sierra, Raul and Van der Windt, Peter. 2013. “Fishing, Commitment, and Communication: A Proposal for Comprehensive Nonbinding Research Registration.” Political Analysis 21(1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, Jeffrey C. 2015. “For a More Public Political Science.” Perspectives on Politics 13 (2): 269–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, William G. and Lupton, Robert N.. 2016. “AJPS Replication and Verification Policy.” American Journal of Political Science. https://ajps.org/ajps-replication-policy/ (Sept. 5, 2016).Google Scholar
Journal Editors Transparency Statement (JETS). 2014. Data Access and Research Transparency (DA-RT). http://www.dartstatement.org/2014-journal-editors-statement-jets (June 2015).Google Scholar
King, Gary. 1995. “Replication, Replication.” PS:Political Science and Politics 28 (3): 444–52.Google Scholar
Kymlicka, Will. 1998. Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ethnocultural Relations in Canada. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lebovitch, Amy. 2015. “Foreword,” Shawna Ferris, Street Sex Work and Canadian Cities: Resisting a Dangerous Order. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur and Alter, George. 2014. “Data Access and Research Transparency in the Quantitative Tradition.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 54–59.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur and Elman, Colin. 2014. “Openness in Political Science: Data Access and Research Transparency.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 19–42.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2014. “Transparency: The Revolution in Qualitative Research.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 48–53.Google Scholar
Pachirat, Timothy. 2015. “The Tyranny of Light.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research: Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section for Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 1327–31.Google Scholar
Parkinson, E. Sarah and Wood, Elisabeth J.. 2015. “Transparency in Intensive Research on Violence: Ethical Dilemmas and Unforeseen Consequences.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 15 (1): 22–27.Google Scholar
Petition from Concerned Scholars. 2015. https://dialogueondartdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/petition-from-concerned-scholars-nov-12-2015-complete.pdf (November 12, 2015).Google Scholar
Powell, Bing. 2016. “Letter From Distinguished Political Scientists Urging Nuanced Journal Interpretation of JETS Policy Guidelines.” PS Now. http://www.politicalsciencenow.com/letter-from-distinguished-political-scientists-urging-nuanced-journal-interpretation-of-jets-policy-guidelines/ (January 13, 2016).Google Scholar
Research Councils UK. 2011. Common Principles on Data Policy. http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/datapolicy (December 7, 2016).Google Scholar
Research Councils UK. 2015. Guidance on Best Practice in the Management of Research Data. http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/documents/rcukcommonprinciplesondatapolicy-pdf (December 7, 2016).Google Scholar
Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine and Yanow, Dvora. 2016. “Legitimizing Political Science or Splitting the Discipline? Reflections on DA-RT and the Policy-making Role of a Professional Association.” Politics & Gender 12 (3): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Séguin, Ève. 2015. “Quand ‘English’ rime avec ‘rubbish’.” Découvrir: Le magazine de l'ACFAS. http://www.acfas.ca/publications/decouvrir/2015/04/quand-english-rime-avec-rubbish (January 25, 2017).Google Scholar
Shih, Victor. 2015. “Research in Authoritarian Regimes: Transparency Tradeoffs and Solutions.” Qualitative & Multi-Method Research 13 (1): 20–21.Google Scholar
Tri-Agency Statement of Principles on Digital Data Management. 2016. http://www.science.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=83F7624E-1 (July 15, 2016).Google Scholar
TCPS2. 2014. Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans. http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2-2014/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf (September 19, 2016).Google Scholar
Warren, Mark E. and Pearse, Hilary. eds. 2008. Designing deliberative democracy: The British Columbia Citizens' Assembly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Melissa S. 1998. Voice, Trust and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yashar, Deborah. 2016. “Editorial Trust, Gatekeeping, and the Unintended Consequences.” Comparative Politics Newsletter 26 (1): 57–64.Google Scholar