Cargando…
Perspectives on scientific error
Theoretical arguments and empirical investigations indicate that a high proportion of published findings do not replicate and are likely false. The current position paper provides a broad perspective on scientific error, which may lead to replication failures. This broad perspective focuses on refor...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10354464/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37476516 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230448 |
_version_ | 1785074934847897600 |
---|---|
author | van Ravenzwaaij, D. Bakker, M. Heesen, R. Romero, F. van Dongen, N. Crüwell, S. Field, S. M. Held, L. Munafò, M. R. Pittelkow, M. M. Tiokhin, L. Traag, V. A. van den Akker, O. R. van ‘t Veer, A. E. Wagenmakers, E. J. |
author_facet | van Ravenzwaaij, D. Bakker, M. Heesen, R. Romero, F. van Dongen, N. Crüwell, S. Field, S. M. Held, L. Munafò, M. R. Pittelkow, M. M. Tiokhin, L. Traag, V. A. van den Akker, O. R. van ‘t Veer, A. E. Wagenmakers, E. J. |
author_sort | van Ravenzwaaij, D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Theoretical arguments and empirical investigations indicate that a high proportion of published findings do not replicate and are likely false. The current position paper provides a broad perspective on scientific error, which may lead to replication failures. This broad perspective focuses on reform history and on opportunities for future reform. We organize our perspective along four main themes: institutional reform, methodological reform, statistical reform and publishing reform. For each theme, we illustrate potential errors by narrating the story of a fictional researcher during the research cycle. We discuss future opportunities for reform. The resulting agenda provides a resource to usher in an era that is marked by a research culture that is less error-prone and a scientific publication landscape with fewer spurious findings. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10354464 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | The Royal Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103544642023-07-20 Perspectives on scientific error van Ravenzwaaij, D. Bakker, M. Heesen, R. Romero, F. van Dongen, N. Crüwell, S. Field, S. M. Held, L. Munafò, M. R. Pittelkow, M. M. Tiokhin, L. Traag, V. A. van den Akker, O. R. van ‘t Veer, A. E. Wagenmakers, E. J. R Soc Open Sci Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Theoretical arguments and empirical investigations indicate that a high proportion of published findings do not replicate and are likely false. The current position paper provides a broad perspective on scientific error, which may lead to replication failures. This broad perspective focuses on reform history and on opportunities for future reform. We organize our perspective along four main themes: institutional reform, methodological reform, statistical reform and publishing reform. For each theme, we illustrate potential errors by narrating the story of a fictional researcher during the research cycle. We discuss future opportunities for reform. The resulting agenda provides a resource to usher in an era that is marked by a research culture that is less error-prone and a scientific publication landscape with fewer spurious findings. The Royal Society 2023-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10354464/ /pubmed/37476516 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230448 Text en © 2023 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience van Ravenzwaaij, D. Bakker, M. Heesen, R. Romero, F. van Dongen, N. Crüwell, S. Field, S. M. Held, L. Munafò, M. R. Pittelkow, M. M. Tiokhin, L. Traag, V. A. van den Akker, O. R. van ‘t Veer, A. E. Wagenmakers, E. J. Perspectives on scientific error |
title | Perspectives on scientific error |
title_full | Perspectives on scientific error |
title_fullStr | Perspectives on scientific error |
title_full_unstemmed | Perspectives on scientific error |
title_short | Perspectives on scientific error |
title_sort | perspectives on scientific error |
topic | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10354464/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37476516 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230448 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanravenzwaaijd perspectivesonscientificerror AT bakkerm perspectivesonscientificerror AT heesenr perspectivesonscientificerror AT romerof perspectivesonscientificerror AT vandongenn perspectivesonscientificerror AT cruwells perspectivesonscientificerror AT fieldsm perspectivesonscientificerror AT heldl perspectivesonscientificerror AT munafomr perspectivesonscientificerror AT pittelkowmm perspectivesonscientificerror AT tiokhinl perspectivesonscientificerror AT traagva perspectivesonscientificerror AT vandenakkeror perspectivesonscientificerror AT vantveerae perspectivesonscientificerror AT wagenmakersej perspectivesonscientificerror |