Set up google form for data collection

[timo-b-roettger]

pdf of their form here

[timo-b-roettger]

Link to our form here.

Comments on form, content, or structure in this issue.

[timo-b-roettger]

• 2.1. Language: I had several instances of educational papers that looked at bilingual situations without specifying the actual languages that have been spoken; another paper was a formal linguistics paper with examples from different languages without specifying what the target population of their claims is, so I assume claims are about "language" in general. Need a category for that.
• 2.2. JIFS: JIFs are only available for the last 10 years (so 2008/09) are out. Solution either take last available JIF or we only note down JIF today.
• 2.4. Study type: formal/theoretical linguistics. Also what to do with literature on translation or educational papers. Are they really about languages?
• 9: Open Access: Is bronce sufficient? What if doi immediately leads to .pdf (no journal page)?

[melroethlisberger]

• 1.3. I checked "article is not about language" but was still forwarded to the questions 2.1, etc., I guess I could then just skip all other questions but it would be nice if I will be automatically forwarded to the last side of the form. The same goes for when you or any other coder cannot access the article. Regarding this later point: how much effort do we put in to find an article?
• 2.1.: I had cases of metastudies where it is not clearly specified, what kind of language the researchers were analysing since they were interested in the articles (and their methods) rather than the actual languages
• 9.0. Shouldn't there also be an option: No, not open access even through unpaywall; only subscription-based? As it is written now, "Yes" means that it is only available through unpaywall but what if it is gold OA? Then you don't even need unpaywall. I would suggest 1) "Yes, is open access on the publisher's website via gold OA", 2) "Yes, is open access via unpaywall (somewhere else)" (suggesting self-archiving), and 3) "No, can only be accessed via subscription". I now added "No, cannot access at all." in cases where I couldn't get access to the article at all. Also, we have to be careful how and when to use unpaywall: If one is within the VPN of the university, unpaywall can find the publisher's version as a legal open access version of the article because this is what is legally allowed if you have paid for subscription. One has to be outside the VPN when using unpaywall.

[mahowak]

1.3 +1 for making it so we can skip right to end if questions not applicable or at least making all questions optional so that it is easy to skip through. 1.3 I had a paper which was about teaching English. The questions were about education, not language. So I considered that to be not about language but would be open to discussion. I also had an article which was a personal remembrance of Washoe, which I coded as not about language, but also open to disucssion.

[mahowak]

1.3 None of my 4 articles was the kind of scientific language paper of the sort I think we mostly imagine focusing on and that would benefit from this method. I wonder if it's worth thinking about picking a restricted set of journals to focus on, even if it means losing some breadth. Just skimming titles, we have a lot of education, poetics, translation, etc. (Education is a huge field so this is maybe not surprising.)

[timo-b-roettger]

Open questions.

• How do we handle JIFs? JIFs are only available for the last 10 years (so 2008/09) are out. Possible solution: either take last available JIF or we only note down JIF at time of coding the article? (edit document
• How do we actually approach the OA question. Melanie made a good point: If we are in our Uni network and the Uni has a subscription, unpaywall will consider it as openaccess. Not being in our Uni network while coding strikes me as terrible inconvenient. Suggestions?

@LiamKeeble @mahowak @melroethlisberger @jvcasillas @caitlin91 @agboch @doomlab

[doomlab]

@troettge

• Maybe just the JIF now?
• I think we caveat the open access section by simply saying "we considered it 'open' if one of the research team could access it but the limitation to this system is paid university access may not be seen as completely open".