Transparency of CHI Research Artifacts: Results of a Self-Reported Survey

Best Paper
Explainable AI (XAI)Research Ethics & Open ScienceUniversity Professors & ResearchersHCI Researchers

Several fields of science are experiencing a "replication crisis" that has negatively impacted their credibility. Assessing the validity of a contribution via replicability of its experimental evidence and reproducibility of its analyses requires access to relevant study materials, data, and code. Failing to share them limits the ability to scrutinize or build-upon the research, ultimately hindering scientific progress.<br>Understanding how the diverse research artifacts in HCI impact sharing can help produce informed recommendations for individual researchers and policy-makers in HCI. Therefore, we surveyed authors of CHI 2018-2019 papers, asking if they share their papers' research materials and data, how they share them, and why they do not. The results (34% response rate) show that sharing is uncommon, partly due to misunderstandings about the purpose of sharing and reliable hosting. We conclude with recommendations for fostering open research practices.<br>This paper and all data and materials are freely available at https://osf.io/3bu6t.

Quick Actions

Share

Share this page

ios_share

https://hci.top/en/papers/chi/32419/2020

AdRecommended

Learn AI Coding at CodeNow

open_in_newOpen DOI Link
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376448
At a Glance

Paper Snapshot

fact_check
dataset
Source
CHI
calendar_month
Year
2020
emoji_events
Award
Best Paper
group
Authors
4 authors
sell
Subtopics
Explainable AI (XAI), Research Ethics & Open Science
work
Professions
University Professors & Researchers, HCI Researchers
article
Content Status
Abstract only
hub
Related Papers
10 related papers