How to build up big team science: a practical guide for large-scale collaborations

Revisiting perceptual sensitivity to non-native speech in a diverse sample of bilinguals

Werker and Tees (1984) prompted decades of research attempting to detail the paths infants take towards specialisation for the sounds of their native language(s). Most of this research has examined the trajectories of monolingual children. However, it has also been proposed that bilinguals, who are exposed to greater phonetic variability than monolinguals and must learn the rules of two languages, may remain perceptually open to non-native language sounds later into life than monolinguals. Using a visual habituation paradigm, the current study tests this question by comparing 15- to 18-month-old monolingual and bilingual children's developmental trajectories for non-native phonetic consonant contrast discrimination. A novel approach to the integration of stimulus presentation software with eye-tracking software was validated for objective measurement of infant looking time. The results did not support the hypothesis of a protracted period of sensitivity to non-native phonetic contrasts in bilingual compared to monolingual infants. Implications for diversification of perceptual narrowing research and implementation of increasingly sensitive measures are discussed.

EEGManyPipelines: A Large-scale, Grassroots Multi-analyst Study of Electroencephalography Analysis Practices in the Wild

The ongoing reproducibility crisis in psychology and cognitive neuroscience has sparked increasing calls to re-evaluate and reshape scientific culture and practices. Heeding those calls, we have recently launched the EEGManyPipelines project as a means to assess the robustness of EEG research in naturalistic conditions and experiment with an alternative model of conducting scientific research. One hundred sixty-eight analyst teams, encompassing 396 individual researchers from 37 countries, independently analyzed the same unpublished, representative EEG data set to test the same set of predefined hypotheses and then provided their analysis pipelines and reported outcomes. Here, we lay out how large-scale scientific projects can be set up in a grassroots, community-driven manner without a central organizing laboratory. We explain our recruitment strategy, our guidance for analysts, the eventual outputs of this project, and how it might have a lasting impact on the field.

Big team science initiatives: A catalyst for trustworthy advancements in IO psychology

Keener et al. (2023) raise concerns about the trustworthiness of Industrial/Organizational (IO) Psychology research and related fields due to the low reproducibility and replicability of research findings. The authors provide various solutions to resolve this crisis, such as improving training, realigning incentives, and adopting open science practices. Our commentary elaborates on one solution to which they briefly allude: Big Team Science Initiatives (BTSIs). BTSIs allow scholars to address the trustworthiness of our science by facilitating large sample theory testing, sharing and allocating resources, and selecting appropriate research strategies, all of which support the reproducibility and replication of research. Further, we propose that BTSIs may facilitate researcher training, encourage data sharing and materials, and realign incentives in our field. We discuss how BTSIs could be implemented in IO psychology and related fields, identifying and drawing upon similar BTSIs in related disciplines. Thus, our commentary is an extension of the focal article, encouraging scholars to collaboratively address the "crisis of confidence" facing our field using a big team science approach.