Every project an OSF user contributes to, as a table you can read and filter
before downloading anything. Pass the whole table, or any subset of it, to
osf_file_download().
Arguments
- user_id
an OSF user ID (the 5-character GUID in a profile URL, e.g.
"4i578"for https://osf.io/4i578)- pb
a progress bar passed from another function
Value
a data frame with one row per project: osf_id, name,
category, public, and osf_url. Zero rows when the user has no
projects that could be listed.
Details
/users/{id}/nodes/ returns each node the user can see, which includes
components as separate rows alongside the projects that contain them.
Downloading a project pulls in its components' files automatically (the
folder structure in osf_file_download() nests them, at any depth), so
listing a component separately would only download the same files twice.
Each node is therefore reduced to its root (relationships$root, which
.osf_node_data() exposes as the project column); a node with no root
recorded stands as its own project.
No file counts or sizes are reported. They would cost an extra request per project and could only ever count files at the project's own root, missing everything inside folders and components – while the download itself already lists each project in full, so the true size is discovered there anyway.
Examples
# \donttest{
if (online("api.osf.io")) {
projects <- osf_user_projects("4i578")
projects[, c("name", "public")]
}
#> name
#> 1 Age Effects on Sexual Desire
#> 2 Social judgments of faces across world regions are predicted better by distinctiveness than masculinity
#> 3 Trust in Psychological Support from AI
#> 4 Generative Confidants
#> 5 Capturing Many Faces
#> 6 ManyLabs Africa
#> 7 Research Transparency Check
#> 8 How Common Empathy Questionnaires Define and Operationalise Empathy
#> 9 Assessing the roles of shape prototypicality and sexual dimorphism in ratings of the trustworthiness of faces
#> 10 Papercheck Test
#> 11 UKRN Shared Resources
#> 12 Dataset for "Trusting emotional support from generative artificial intelligence: a conceptual review"
#> 13 Sociosexuality and self-rated attractiveness
#> 14 UKRN Primer on Computational Reproducibility
#> 15 Course Syllabi for Open and Reproducible Methods
#> 16 The Psychological Science Accelerator: A Distributed Laboratory Network
#> 17 Justify Your Alpha
#> 18 Investigating Object Orientation Effects Across 14 Languages
#> 19 A Grim Image: Considerations for Methods of portrait photography in psychological science
#> 20 Who looks competent for what? Context-sensitivity in the predictors of competence judgments of faces
#> 21 Scienceverse Test Project
#> 22 Data Simulation Workshops
#> 23 Supplemental materials for preprint: Putting the Self in Self-Correction
#> 24 Putting the Self in Self-Correction
#> 25 Sexual orientation predicts women’s preferences for sexually dimorphic face-shape characteristics
#> 26 UK Network of Open Research Working Groups (UK-ORWG)
#> 27 The Composite Method Produces High False Positive Rates
#> 28 Do 3D face images capture cues of strength, weight, and height better than 2D face images do?
#> 29 Understanding mixed effects models through data simulation
#> 30 Data visualisation using R, for researchers who don't use R
#> 31 Meta-Psychology
#> 32 Prototypicality, but not sexual dimorphism, of face shape predicts perceptions of trustworthiness
#> 33 Embedding Data Skills in Research Methods Training
#> 34 3DSK face set with webmorph templates
#> 35 Reproducible Stimuli
#> 36 KINSHIP: How do humans recognize kin?
#> 37 ManyFaces
#> 38 Self-resembling and partner-resembling biases in perceptions of attractiveness and trustworthiness
#> 39 Facial similarity, sibling judgments and couple judgments: A replication study using actual couples and random pairs
#> 40 KINSHIP Lab Pairs
#> 41 KINSHIP Family Resemblance
#> 42 Facial similarity predicts sibling judgments but not couple judgments
#> 43 Re-evaluating the relation between pathogen avoidance and preferences for facial symmetry and sexual dimorphism: A registered report
#> 44 Simulations assessing power to detect small effect sizes for interactions between sexual desire type (extra- versus in-pair), conception risk, and a between-subjects moderator, such as partner attractiveness
#> 45 Correlated preferences for male facial masculinity and symmetry
#> 46 No evidence that inbreeding avoidance is up-regulated during the ovulatory phase of the menstrual cycle - Study 1
#> 47 Professional Skills: Using and creating Open Science resources
#> 48 Do voices carry valid information about a speaker’s personality?
#> 49 Methods in Face Research Workshop
#> 50 Sexual orientation predicts men’s preferences for sexually dimorphic face-shape characteristics: a replication study.
#> 51 Are sexual desire and sociosexual orientation related to men’s salivary steroid hormones?
#> 52 Preregistered replication of “Sick body, vigilant mind: The biological immune system activates the behavioral immune system”
#> 53 Are affective factors related to individual differences in facial expression recognition?
#> 54 Trust Among Siblings is Intuitive
#> 55 FRL 2D Face Shape Analyses
#> 56 Comparing theory-driven and data-driven attractiveness models using images of real women’s faces
#> 57 Distribution of facial resemblance in romantic couples suggests both positive and negative assortative processes influence human mate choice
#> 58 Supplemental materials for preprint: Improving Transparency, Falsifiability, and Rigour by Making Hypothesis Tests Machine Readable
#> 59 Do more attractive women show stronger preferences for male facial masculinity?
#> 60 Facial Resemblance Enhances Trust (supplemental material)
#> 61 Trustworthy but not lust-worthy
#> 62 KINRES: effects of age and sex
#> 63 Does women’s anxious jealousy track changes in steroid hormone levels?
#> 64 UofG School of Psychology/INP Friday Seminars
#> 65 Chinese and UK participants’ preferences for physical attractiveness and social status in potential mates (Registered Report)
#> 66 MP.2019.2120.Drummond
#> 67 Does head tilt have category-contingent effects on leadership ratings?
#> 68 Assessing the evidentiary value of secondary data analyses: A commentary on Gangestad, Dinh, Grebe, Del Giudice, and Thompson (2019)
#> 69 KINRES The effect of birth order on 3rd party kin recognition
#> 70 No evidence that partnered and unpartnered gay men differ in their preferences for male facial masculinity
#> 71 Having other-sex siblings predicts moral attitudes to sibling incest, but not parent-child incest
#> 72 Cambridge June 2019 PSA
#> 73 Is vocal attractiveness a cue of young adult women’s susceptibility to infectious illnesses?
#> 74 Exploring the potential for kinship signalling in the human voice - Experiment 2 (Similarity)
#> 75 A data-driven test for cross-cultural differences in face preferences
#> 76 Are sex differences in preferences for physical attractiveness and good earning capacity in potential mates smaller in countries with greater gender equality?
#> 77 Open Science Toolbox: Leveraging Methodological Reforms to Accelerate Research (ICPS Paris March 2019)
#> 78 Re-analyses of Shimoda et al. (2018): conception risk affects in- and extra-pair desire similarly
#> 79 Durham Psychology PGR Conference 2019
#> 80 KINRES Methodology in Third Party Kin Recognition
#> 81 Are attractive female voices really best characterized by feminine fundamental and formant frequencies?
#> 82 Open Science Presentations
#> 83 Does the interaction between partnership status and average progesterone level predict women’s preferences for facial masculinity?
#> 84 No evidence that women using oral contraceptives have weaker preferences for masculine characteristics in men’s faces
#> 85 KINRES The contribution of Texture and Shape Information to Kinship Judgments in 3D faces
#> 86 KINRES Sibling Smiles
#> 87 Ovulation, sex hormones, and women’s mating psychology
#> 88 A data-driven test for cross-cultural differences in face-shape preferences
#> 89 Predicting the reward value of faces and bodies from social perceptions: Supplemental Materials
#> 90 Are dark triad cues really visible in faces?
#> 91 Further evidence for associations between short-term mating strategy and sexual disgust
#> 92 Context-specific effects of facial dominance and trustworthiness on leadership judgments
#> 93 GUPsych Dissertation RR
#> 94 No evidence that facial attractiveness, femininity, averageness, or coloration are cues to susceptibility to infectious illnesses in a university sample of young adult women
#> 95 Reproducibility Rocks
#> 96 How to Avoid Incest (ISHE 2018)
#> 97 The influence of facial femininity on Chinese and White UK women’s jealousy
#> 98 Kin recognition in actual and virtual siblings
#> 99 KIN RECOGNITION 2D-3D
#> 100 Does the strength of women’s attraction to male vocal masculinity track changes in steroid hormones?
#> 101 KINRES: parent/child resemblance
#> 102 The influence of facial femininity on Chinese and White UK women’s jealousy
#> 103 Does susceptibility to infectious illnesses track changes in women’s hormonal status?
#> 104 Do young adults’ faces contain visible correlates of their susceptibility to infectious illnesses? A p-curve analysis
#> 105 Determining the number of raters for reliable mean ratings
#> 106 Smiling vs neutral attractiveness ratings
#> 107 No compelling evidence that more physically attractive young adult women have higher estradiol or progesterone
#> 108 Facial resemblance increases the attractiveness of same-sex faces more than other-sex faces: Data and Analyses
#> 109 HBES 2018
#> 110 No evidence that facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR) is associated with women’s sexual desire
#> 111 No evidence that facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR) is associated with women’s sexual desire
#> 112 Individual-specific mortality is associated with how individuals evaluate future discounting decisions
#> 113 Supplemental Data for "General sexual desire, but not desire for uncommitted sexual relationships, tracks changes in women’s hormonal status"
#> 114 No evidence for associations between men’s salivary testosterone and responses on the Intrasexual Competitiveness Scale
#> 115 Facial masculinity is only weakly correlated with handgrip strength in young adult women
#> 116 Supplemental information for "No evidence that preferences for facial masculinity track changes in women’s hormonal status"
#> 117 Does adult sex ratio predict regional variation in facial dominance perceptions? Evidence from an analysis of US states
#> 118 Supplemental Data for "Hormonal correlates of pathogen disgust: Testing the Compensatory Prophylaxis Hypothesis"
#> 119 Sexual Desire Inventory (SDI-2) data
#> 120 A data-driven study of Chinese participants’ social judgments of Chinese faces
#> 121 Waist-to-chest ratio predicts the reward value of men’s bodies linearly, but not quadratically
#> 122 No evidence for correlations between handgrip strength and sexually dimorphic acoustic properties of voices
#> 123 Cultural differences in preferences for facial coloration
#> 124 Discrimination of attractiveness and health in men’s faces
#> 125 Positive sexual imprinting for human eye color
#> 126 Comparing Analyses for Face Preferences
#> 127 Women’s preference for attractive makeup tracks changes in their salivary testosterone
#> 128 Average Faces
#> 129 Disease-related factors predict between-region, between-individual and within-individual variation in mate preferences
#> 130 Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) 2024 Meeting
#> 131 UKRN Open Research Programme - Evaluation
#> 132 <NA>
#> 133 <NA>
#> 134 PSACR: The Psychological Science Accelerator's COVID-19 Rapid-Response Project
#> 135 Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) 2018 Meeting
#> 136 Advanced Methods Workshop
#> 137 Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) 2022 Meeting
#> 138 Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) 2019 Meeting
#> public
#> 1 TRUE
#> 2 TRUE
#> 3 TRUE
#> 4 TRUE
#> 5 TRUE
#> 6 TRUE
#> 7 TRUE
#> 8 TRUE
#> 9 TRUE
#> 10 TRUE
#> 11 TRUE
#> 12 TRUE
#> 13 TRUE
#> 14 TRUE
#> 15 TRUE
#> 16 TRUE
#> 17 TRUE
#> 18 TRUE
#> 19 TRUE
#> 20 TRUE
#> 21 TRUE
#> 22 TRUE
#> 23 TRUE
#> 24 TRUE
#> 25 TRUE
#> 26 TRUE
#> 27 TRUE
#> 28 TRUE
#> 29 TRUE
#> 30 TRUE
#> 31 TRUE
#> 32 TRUE
#> 33 TRUE
#> 34 TRUE
#> 35 TRUE
#> 36 TRUE
#> 37 TRUE
#> 38 TRUE
#> 39 TRUE
#> 40 TRUE
#> 41 TRUE
#> 42 TRUE
#> 43 TRUE
#> 44 TRUE
#> 45 TRUE
#> 46 TRUE
#> 47 TRUE
#> 48 TRUE
#> 49 TRUE
#> 50 TRUE
#> 51 TRUE
#> 52 TRUE
#> 53 TRUE
#> 54 TRUE
#> 55 TRUE
#> 56 TRUE
#> 57 TRUE
#> 58 TRUE
#> 59 TRUE
#> 60 TRUE
#> 61 TRUE
#> 62 TRUE
#> 63 TRUE
#> 64 TRUE
#> 65 TRUE
#> 66 TRUE
#> 67 TRUE
#> 68 TRUE
#> 69 TRUE
#> 70 TRUE
#> 71 TRUE
#> 72 TRUE
#> 73 TRUE
#> 74 TRUE
#> 75 TRUE
#> 76 TRUE
#> 77 TRUE
#> 78 TRUE
#> 79 TRUE
#> 80 TRUE
#> 81 TRUE
#> 82 TRUE
#> 83 TRUE
#> 84 TRUE
#> 85 TRUE
#> 86 TRUE
#> 87 TRUE
#> 88 TRUE
#> 89 TRUE
#> 90 TRUE
#> 91 TRUE
#> 92 TRUE
#> 93 TRUE
#> 94 TRUE
#> 95 TRUE
#> 96 TRUE
#> 97 TRUE
#> 98 TRUE
#> 99 TRUE
#> 100 TRUE
#> 101 TRUE
#> 102 TRUE
#> 103 TRUE
#> 104 TRUE
#> 105 TRUE
#> 106 TRUE
#> 107 TRUE
#> 108 TRUE
#> 109 TRUE
#> 110 TRUE
#> 111 TRUE
#> 112 TRUE
#> 113 TRUE
#> 114 TRUE
#> 115 TRUE
#> 116 TRUE
#> 117 TRUE
#> 118 TRUE
#> 119 TRUE
#> 120 TRUE
#> 121 TRUE
#> 122 TRUE
#> 123 TRUE
#> 124 TRUE
#> 125 TRUE
#> 126 TRUE
#> 127 TRUE
#> 128 TRUE
#> 129 TRUE
#> 130 TRUE
#> 131 TRUE
#> 132 FALSE
#> 133 FALSE
#> 134 TRUE
#> 135 TRUE
#> 136 TRUE
#> 137 TRUE
#> 138 TRUE
# }
if (FALSE) { # \dontrun{
# download only the public ones
projects |>
subset(public) |>
osf_file_download(download_to = "my_osf")
} # }