We issue a call for the design and conduct of experimental trials to test the effects of researchers’ adoption of Open Science (OS) research practices. OS emerged to address lapses in the transparency, quality, integrity, and reproducibility of research by proposing that investigators institute practices, such as preregistering study hypotheses, procedures, and statistical analyses, before launching their research. These practices have been greeted with enthusiasm by some parts of the scientific community, but empirical evidence of their effects relies mainly on observational studies; furthermore, questions remain about the time and effort required by these practices and their ultimate benefit to science. To assess the outcomes of OS research practices, we propose they be viewed as behavioral interventions for scientists and tested in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), to identify potential benefits and (unintended) harms. As this is a call to action rather than an action plan per se, we sketch out four potential trial designs to encourage further deliberation and planning. Experimental tests to document the outcomes of OS practices can provide evidence to optimize how scientists, funders, policymakers, and institutions utilize these strategies to advance scientific practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

中文翻译：

---

现在是通过随机对照试验评估开放科学实践的效果的时候了。

我们呼吁设计和进行实验性试验，以测试研究人员采用开放科学 (OS) 研究实践的效果。OS 的出现是为了解决研究透明度、质量、完整性和可重复性方面的问题，建议研究人员在开展研究之前制定实践，例如预先注册研究假设、程序和统计分析。这些做法受到科学界某些部分的热烈欢迎，但其效果的经验证据主要依赖于观察研究；此外，关于这些实践所需的时间和努力及其对科学的最终益处的问题仍然存在。评估操作系统研究实践的结果，我们建议将它们视为科学家的行为干预，并在随机对照试验 (RCT) 中进行测试，以确定潜在的益处和（意外的）危害。由于这是行动号召而非行动计划本身，我们勾勒出四种可能的试验设计以鼓励进一步的审议和规划。记录 OS 实践结果的实验​​测试可以提供证据来优化科学家、资助者、政策制定者和机构如何利用这些策略来推进科学实践。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）记录 OS 实践结果的实验​​测试可以提供证据来优化科学家、资助者、政策制定者和机构如何利用这些策略来推进科学实践。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）记录 OS 实践结果的实验​​测试可以提供证据来优化科学家、资助者、政策制定者和机构如何利用这些策略来推进科学实践。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）