Transparency of CHI Research Artifacts: Results of a Self-Reported Survey
Best PaperAuthors
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.
Research Questions / Practical Problems
Question signals indexed for this paper.
- 80%
Integrating measures of replicability into scholarly search: Challenges and opportunities
CHI '24· Explainable AI (XAI) +2
- 80%
What Happens When Reviewers Receive AI Feedback in Their Reviews?
CHI '26· Human-LLM Collaboration +2
- 75%
Changes in Research Ethics, Openness, and Transparency in Empirical Studies between CHI 2017 and CHI 2022
CHI '23· Research Ethics & Open Science
- 67%
Reporting and Reviewing LLM-Integrated Systems in HCI: Challenges and Considerations
CHI '26· Human-LLM Collaboration +2
- 60%
Don’t Forget To Be The Way You Are: How to Create a Meaningful and Sustainable Research Identity
CHI '18· User Research Methods (Interviews, Surveys, Observation) +1
- 60%
Daring to Change: Creating a Slower More Sustainable Academic Life
CHI '18· Research Ethics & Open Science +1
- 60%
Are You Open? A Content Analysis of Transparency and Openness Guidelines in HCI Journals
CHI '21· Algorithmic Transparency & Auditability +1
- 60%
Designing for Knowledge Construction to Facilitate the Uptake of Open Science: Laying out the Design Space
CHI '22· User Research Methods (Interviews, Surveys, Observation) +1
- 60%
"I Didn't Know I Looked Angry": Characterizing Observed Emotion and Reported Affect at Work
CHI '22· Human Pose & Activity Recognition +1
- 60%
Apéritif: Scaffolding Preregistrations to Automatically Generate Analysis Code and Methods Descriptions
CHI '22· Computational Methods in HCI +1
Based on Jaccard similarity of research subtopics & professions (≥60%)