Navigating the garden of forking paths for data exclusions in fear conditioning research
Navigating the garden of forking paths for data exclusions in fear conditioning research
复制标题
DOI：
10.7554/elife.52465
复制
发表时间：
2019-12-16
期刊：
影响因子：
7.7
通讯作者：
Merz, Christian J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lonsdorf, Tina B.;Klingelhoefer-Jens, Maren;Merz, Christian J.
在这份报告中，我们说明了相当大的影响，研究人员的自由度与排除参与者的范式与学习元素。我们通过人类恐惧条件反射研究的案例实例来说明这一点，其中排除“非学习者”和“非反应者”是常见的-尽管缺乏共识，如何定义这些群体。我们说明了大量的异质性排除标准中确定的系统性文献检索，并强调了潜在的问题和陷阱的不同的定义，通过案例的基础上重新分析现有的数据集。在这些研究的基础上，我们提出了一个基于证据的共识，而不是特质的标准，包括报告细节的明确指导方针。两者合计，我们说明了如何在数据收集和分析的灵活性，可以避免，这将有利于研究结果的鲁棒性和可复制性，并可以预期适用于其他领域的研究，涉及学习元素。
In this report, we illustrate the considerable impact of researcher degrees of freedom with respect to exclusion of participants in paradigms with a learning element. We illustrate this empirically through case examples from human fear conditioning research, in which the exclusion of 'non-learners' and 'non-responders' is common - despite a lack of consensus on how to define these groups. We illustrate the substantial heterogeneity in exclusion criteria identified in a systematic literature search and highlight the potential problems and pitfalls of different definitions through case examples based on re-analyses of existing data sets. On the basis of these studies, we propose a consensus on evidence-based rather than idiosyncratic criteria, including clear guidelines on reporting details. Taken together, we illustrate how flexibility in data collection and analysis can be avoided, which will benefit the robustness and replicability of research findings and can be expected to be applicable to other fields of research that involve a learning element.