Banner Portal
Letter to the editor


Experimental phonetics
Phonetic sciences
Research data
Data curation
Data conservation
Open access
Open archives
Open science

How to Cite

Garellek M, Simpson A, Roettger TB, Recasens D, Niebuhr O, Mooshammer C, et al. Letter to the editor: toward open data policies in phonetics: what we can gain and how we can avoid pitfalls. J. of Speech Sci. [Internet]. 2020 Sep. 9 [cited 2024 May 30];9(00):03-16. Available from:


It is not yet standard practice in phonetics to provide access to audio files along with submissions to journals. This is paradoxical in view of the importance of data for phonetic research: from audio signals to the whole range of data acquired in phonetic experiments. The phonetic sciences stand to gain greatly from data availability: what is at stake is no less than reproducibility and cumulative progress. We will argue that a collective turn to Open Science holds great promise for phonetics. First, simple reflections on why access to primary data matters are recapitulated and proposed as a basis for consensus. Next, possible drawbacks of data availability are addressed. Finally, we argue that data curation and archiving are to be recognized as part of the same activity that results in the publication of research papers, rather than attempting to build a parallel system to incentivize data archiving by itself.


Demolin D. Experimental methods in phonology. TIPA Travaux interdisciplinaires sur la parole et le langage. 1992;28. Available from:

Berez-Kroeker AL, Gawne, Lauren, Kung, Susan Smythe, Kelly, Barbara F, Heston, Tyler, Holton, Gary, et al. Reproducible research in linguistics: a position statement on data citation and attribution in our field. Linguistics. 2018;56(1):1–18.

Morey RD, Chambers CD, Etchells PJ, Harris CR, Hoekstra R, Lakens D, et al. The Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review. Royal Society Open Science [Internet]. 2016;3(1). Available from:

Nosek BA. Center for Open Science: strategic plan. OSF Preprints [Internet]. 2017. Available from: doi:10.31219/

Munafò MR, Nosek BA, Bishop DVM, Button KS, Chambers CD, Percie du Sert N, et al. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour. 2017;1:21.

Roettger TB. Researcher degrees of freedom in phonetic research. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology. 2019;10(1). Available from:

Lipton ZC, Steinhardt J. Troubling trends in Machine Learning scholarship. acmqueue - Association for Computing Machinery. 2019;17(1):1–33.

Roettger TB, Winter B, Baayen H. Emergent data analysis in phonetic sciences: Towards pluralism and reproducibility. Journal of Phonetics. 2019;73:1–7.

Piwowar HA, Vision TJ. Data reuse and the open data citation advantage. PeerJ. 2013;1:e175.

McKiernan EC, Bourne PE, Brown CT, Buck S, Kenall A, Lin J, et al. Point of view: How open science helps researchers succeed. Elife. 2016;5:e16800.

Houtkoop BL, Chambers C, Macleod M, Bishop DV, Nichols TE, Wagenmakers E-J. Data sharing in psychology: A survey on barriers and preconditions. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. 2018;1(1):70–85.

Borgman CL. Big data, little data, no data: scholarship in the networked world. MIT Press; 2015.

Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U. False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science. 2011;22(11):1359–66.

Wagner P, Trouvain J, Zimmerer F. In defense of stylistic diversity in speech research. Journal of Phonetics. 2015;48:1–12.

Vasile A, Guillaume S, Aouini M, Michaud A. Le Digital Object Identifier, une impérieuse nécessité ? L’exemple de l’attribution de DOI à la Collection Pangloss, archive ouverte de langues en danger. I2D - Information, données & documents. 2020; Available from:

Nicenboim B, Roettger TB, Vasishth S. Using meta-analysis for evidence synthesis: The case of incomplete neutralization in German. Journal of Phonetics. 2018;70:39–55.

Silberzahn R, Uhlmann EL, Martin DP, Anselmi P, Aust F, Awtrey EC, et al. Many analysts, one dataset: Making transparent how variations in analytical choices affect results [Internet]. PsyArXiv; 2017. Available from:

Remijsen B, Ayoker OG. Contrastive tonal alignment in falling contours in Shilluk. Phonology. 2014;31(3):435–62.

Barnes J, Veilleux N, Brugos A, Shattuck-Hufnagel S. The interaction of timing and scaling in a lexical tone system: an example from Shilluk. In: Calhoun S, Escudero P, editors. Proceedings of ICPhS XIX (19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences). Melbourne: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association; 2019.

Tennant JP, Crane H, Crick T, Davila J, Enkhbayar A, Havemann J, et al. Ten hot topics around scholarly publishing. Publications. 2019;7(2):1–24.

Open Science Collaboration. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015;349(6251):aac4716.

Brugger P. From haunted brain to haunted science: A cognitive neuroscience view of paranormal and pseudoscientific thought. In: Houran J, Lange R, editors. Hauntings and poltergeists: Multidisciplinary perspectives. 2001. p. 195–213.

Bachelard G. La Formation de l’esprit scientifique. Contribution à une psychanalyse de la connaissance objective. Paris: Vrin; 1938.

Nickerson RS. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology. 1998;2(2):175–220.

Fischhoff B. Hindsight-foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. American Psychological Association; 1974. Available from:

Maurel L. Quel statut pour les données de la recherche après la loi numérique ? [Internet]. S.I.Lex. 2016. Available from:

Niebuhr O, Michaud A. Speech data acquisition: the underestimated challenge. KALIPHO - Kieler Arbeiten zur Linguistik und Phonetik. 2015;3:1–42.

Niebuhr O, Michalsky J. PASCAL and DPA: A pilot study on using prosodic competence scores to predict communicative skills for team working and public speaking. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2019. Graz; 2019. p. 306–10.

Snowden E. Permanent record. Macmillan; 2019.

Leach CW. Editorial. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2019; Available from:

Thieberger N, Margetts A, Morey S, Musgrave S. Assessing annotated corpora as research output. Australian Journal of Linguistics. 2016;36(1):1–21.

Drude S. Reflections on diversity linguistics: Language inventories and atlases. In: McDonnell B, Berez-Kroeker AL, Holton G, editors. Reflections on language documentation 20 years after Himmelmann 1998. 2018. p. 122–31. (Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication).

Boas F. Tsimshian texts. Washington: Government Printing Office; 1902. 244 p. (Bulletin of the Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of American Ethnology).

Woodbury T. Defining documentary linguistics. In: Austin P, editor. Language documentation and description. London: School of African and Oriental Studies; 2003. p. 35–51.

Baccini A, De Nicolao G, Petrovich E. Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis. PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0221212.

Biagioli M. Watch out for cheats in citation game. Nature. 2016;535(7611):201.

Ripple WJ, Wolf C, Newsome TM, Galetti M, Alamgir M, Crist E, et al. World scientists’ warning to humanity: a second notice. BioScience. 2017;67(12):1026–8.

Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IjJ, Appleton G, Axton M, Baak A, et al. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data. 2016 Mar 15;3:160018.

Lust BC, Blume M, Pareja-Lora A, Chiarcos C. Development of Linguistic Linked Open Data resources for collaborative data-intensive research in the language sciences: An introduction. In: Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2019.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2020 Marc Garellek, Adrian Simpson, Timo B. Roettger, Daniel Recasens, Oliver Niebuhr, Christine Mooshammer, Alexis Michaud, Wai-Sum Lee, James Kirby, Matthew Gordon, Kristine M. Yu


Download data is not yet available.