Increased scientific rigor will improve reliability of research and effectiveness of management
Increased scientific rigor will improve reliability of research and effectiveness of management
复制标题
科学严谨性的提高将提高研究的可靠性和管理的有效性
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. S. Mitchell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Sells;S. Bassing;K. Barker;Shannon C. Forshee;Allison C. Keever;James W. Goerz;M. S. Mitchell
产生可靠知识的严谨科学对野生动物管理至关重要，因为它增加了对自然世界的准确理解，并有效地为管理决策提供信息。应用基于假设检验的严格科学方法，最大限度地减少研究产生的不可靠知识。为了评估野生动物研究中科学严谨性的普遍性，我们检查了2013年8月至2016年7月的24期《野生动物管理杂志》。我们发现，43.9%的研究没有陈述或暗示先验假设，而先验假设是产生可靠知识所必需的。我们认为，这至少部分是由于缺乏对严谨科学的共同理解，它如何产生比其他形式的解释观察更可靠的知识，以及研究应该如何设计，以最大限度地发挥推理的力量和应用的有用性。目前的主要文献并没有提供简洁的解释背后的逻辑严格的科学方法或易于适用的指导使用它，特别是在野生动物生物学，因此，我们综合了历史，哲学和逻辑，定义科学严谨的生物学研究的概述。严格的科学方法包括1）从理论和先前的观察中产生研究问题，2）发展假设（即，问题的合理生物学答案），3）制定预测（即，如果假设为真，则必须为真的事实），4）设计和实施研究，以收集可能与预测一致的数据，5）评估预测是否与收集的数据一致，以及6）基于评估得出推论。解释性检验先验假设通过将合理的生物学解释的数量减少到只有那些在逻辑上得到很好支持的生物学解释的数量来减少总体的不确定性。这样的研究还得出了对特殊观察和不可避免的人类偏见具有鲁棒性的推论。只提供统计模式的事后解释（即，后验假设）增加了不确定性，因为它增加了合理的生物学解释的数量，而没有确定哪些具有最大的支持。此外，事后解释强烈受到人类偏见的影响。检验假设最大限度地提高了研究结果的可信度，为理论和管理做出了最大的贡献，并提高了研究的可重复性。基于严格研究的管理决策最有可能导致有效保护野生动物资源。
Rigorous science that produces reliable knowledge is critical to wildlife management because it increases accurate understanding of the natural world and informs management decisions effectively. Application of a rigorous scientific method based on hypothesis testing minimizes unreliable knowledge produced by research. To evaluate the prevalence of scientific rigor in wildlife research, we examined 24 issues of the Journal ofWildlifeManagement fromAugust 2013 through July 2016.We found 43.9% of studies did not state or imply a priori hypotheses, which are necessary to produce reliable knowledge.We posit that this is due, at least in part, to a lack of common understanding of what rigorous science entails, how it produces more reliable knowledge than other forms of interpreting observations, and how research should be designed to maximize inferential strength and usefulness of application. Current primary literature does not provide succinct explanations of the logic behind a rigorous scientific method or readily applicable guidance for employing it, particularly in wildlife biology; we therefore synthesized an overview of the history, philosophy, and logic that define scientific rigor for biological studies. A rigorous scientific method includes 1) generating a research question from theory and prior observations, 2) developing hypotheses (i.e., plausible biological answers to the question), 3) formulating predictions (i.e., facts that must be true if the hypothesis is true), 4) designing and implementing research to collect data potentially consistent with predictions, 5) evaluating whether predictions are consistent with collected data, and 6) drawing inferences based on the evaluation. Explicitly testing a priori hypotheses reduces overall uncertainty by reducing the number of plausible biological explanations to only those that are logically well supported. Such research also draws inferences that are robust to idiosyncratic observations and unavoidable human biases. Offering only post hoc interpretations of statistical patterns (i.e., a posteriori hypotheses) adds to uncertainty because it increases the number of plausible biological explanations without determining which have the greatest support. Further, post hoc interpretations are strongly subject to human biases. Testing hypotheses maximizes the credibility of research findings, makes the strongest contributions to theory and management, and improves reproducibility of research. Management decisions based on rigorous research are most likely to result in effective conservation of wildlife resources.