Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists.
Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/beheco/arx003
复制
发表时间：
2017-03
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Croucher M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ihle M;Winney IS;Krystalli A;Croucher M
对科学可信性的怀疑可以通过开放的研究实践解除。低可靠性（没有偏差）和可重复性（透明的工作流程）导致独立研究得出相同结果的可能性很低（缺乏可重复性）。为了规避这些问题，我们讨论了由开放科学中心提出的透明度和开放性促进指南，以及软件工程工具包如何使研究人员接受开放科学过程。科学本应是对世界进行系统和客观的研究，但有证据表明，科学实践有时达不到这一期望。在这个受邀的想法中，我们认为，任何根据文件计划进行研究的失败（缺乏可靠性）和/或任何未能确保重新进行相同的项目将提供相同的发现（缺乏可重复性），将导致独立研究获得相同结果的可能性很低（缺乏可重复性）。在更广泛地概述了行为生态学和科学面临的挑战，并结合开放科学中心（COS）等国际组织的建议后，我们提出了明确的指导方针和教程，说明我们认为开放实践对行为生态学家来说意味着什么。此外，我们指出了一些目前最合适的和免费提供的工具来采用这些实践。最后，我们建议该领域的所有期刊，如行为生态学，给予透明研究额外的权重，从而提供更大的激励，使我们的科学实践与我们的科学价值观保持一致。总的来说，我们认为，为了每个研究人员个人和整个社会的利益，现在完全可以产生明显可信的科学。
Doubts over the credibility of science can be lifted by open research practices. Low reliability (absence of biases) and reproducibility (transparent workflow) result in a low probability of independent studies reaching the same outcome (lack of replicability). To circumvent these issues, we discuss how the Transparency and Openness Promotion guidelines, proposed by the Center for Open Science, along with a software engineering toolkit allow researchers to embrace the open science process. Science is meant to be the systematic and objective study of the world but evidence suggests that scientific practices are sometimes falling short of this expectation. In this invited idea, we argue that any failure to conduct research according to a documented plan (lack of reliability) and/or any failure to ensure that reconducting the same project would provide the same finding (lack of reproducibility), will result in a low probability of independent studies reaching the same outcome (lack of replicability). After outlining the challenges facing behavioral ecology and science more broadly and incorporating advice from international organizations such as the Center for Open Science (COS), we present clear guidelines and tutorials on what we think open practices represent for behavioral ecologists. In addition, we indicate some of the currently most appropriate and freely available tools for adopting these practices. Finally, we suggest that all journals in our field, such as Behavioral Ecology, give additional weight to transparent studies and therefore provide greater incentives to align our scientific practices to our scientific values. Overall, we argue that producing demonstrably credible science is now fully achievable for the benefit of each researcher individually and for our community as a whole.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
56.9
作者：
Evans, James A.;Reimer, Jacob
通讯作者：
Reimer, Jacob
影响因子：
12.6
作者：
Alexander, Anita;Barnett-Cowan, Michael;Vianello, Michelangelo
通讯作者：
Vianello, Michelangelo
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
Bulla, Martin;Cresswell, Will;Kempenaers, Bart
通讯作者：
Kempenaers, Bart
DOI：
10.1080/08989628908573770
发表时间：
1989-09-01
期刊：
Accountability in research
影响因子：
--
作者：
Francis, J R
通讯作者：
Francis, J R
影响因子：
3
作者：
Kardish, Melissa R.;Mueller, Ulrich G.;Fang, Chi-Chun
通讯作者：
Fang, Chi-Chun