skip to main content
10.1145/3027385.3029429acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageslakConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Beyond failure: the 2nd LAK Failathon

Published: 13 March 2017 Publication History

Abstract

The 2nd LAK Failathon will build on the successful event in 2016 and extend the workshop beyond discussing individual experiences of failure to exploring how the field can improve, particularly regarding the creation and use of evidence.
Failure in research is an increasingly hot topic, with high-profile crises of confidence in the published research literature in medicine and psychology. Among the major factors in this research crisis are the many incentives to report and publish only positive findings. These incentives prevent the field in general from learning from negative findings, and almost entirely preclude the publication of mistakes and errors. Thus providing an alternative forum for practitioners and researchers to learn from each other's failures can be very productive. The first LAK Failathon, held in 2016, provided just such an opportunity for researchers and practitioners to share their failures and negative findings in a lower-stakes environment, to help participants learn from each other's mistakes. It was very successful, and there was strong support for running it as an annual event. This workshop will build on that success, with twin objectives to provide an environment for individuals to learn from each other's failures, and also to co-develop plans for how we as a field can better build and deploy our evidence base.

References

[1]
Greenhalgh, T., Howick, J., & Maskrey, N. (2014). Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 2014;348:g3725
[2]
Ioannidis, J. P. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med, 2(8), e124.
[3]
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2016). Why Most Clinical Research Is Not Useful. PLoS Med 13(6): e1002049.
[4]
Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 28 Aug 2015: 349(6251).
[5]
Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J., & Yap, A. J. (2010). Power posing brief nonverbal displays affect neuroendocrine levels and risk tolerance. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1363--1368.
[6]
Cuddy, A. (2012). Your body language shapes who you are. TED talk, https://www.ted.com/talks/amy_cuddy_your_body_language_shapes_who_you_are
[7]
Carney, D. (2016). My position on "Power Poses. Blog post: http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/dana_carney/pdfMy%20position%20on%20power%20poses.pdf
[8]
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological science, 0956797611417632.
[9]
Gelman, A. & Loken, E. (2013). The garden of forking paths: Why multiple comparisons can be a problem, even when there is no "fishing expedition" or "p-hacking" and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time. Blog post: http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/p_hacking.pdf
[10]
Smaldino, P.E. & McElreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science. R. Soc. open sci. 3:160384.
[11]
Ferguson, R & Clow, D. (2015). Evidence Hub Second Review D2.8. http://www.laceproject.eu/deliverables/d2-8-evidence-hub-second-review/
[12]
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2014). How to Make More Published Research True. PLoS Med 11(10): e1001747.

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Wild brooms and learning analyticsJournal of Computing in Higher Education10.1007/s12528-023-09353-636:1(145-153)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2023

Index Terms

  1. Beyond failure: the 2nd LAK Failathon

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    LAK '17: Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference
    March 2017
    631 pages
    ISBN:9781450348706
    DOI:10.1145/3027385
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 13 March 2017

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. analytics
    2. evidence
    3. learning analytics
    4. learning from failure

    Qualifiers

    • Abstract

    Conference

    LAK '17
    LAK '17: 7th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference
    March 13 - 17, 2017
    British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

    Acceptance Rates

    LAK '17 Paper Acceptance Rate 36 of 114 submissions, 32%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 236 of 782 submissions, 30%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 10 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Wild brooms and learning analyticsJournal of Computing in Higher Education10.1007/s12528-023-09353-636:1(145-153)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2023

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media