Cargando…

An Open Science Peer Review Oath

One of the foundations of the scientific method is to be able to reproduce experiments and corroborate the results of research that has been done before. However, with the increasing complexities of new technologies and techniques, coupled with the specialisation of experiments, reproducing research...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aleksic, Jelena, Alexa, Adrian, Attwood, Teresa K, Chue Hong, Neil, Dahlö, Martin, Davey, Robert, Dinkel, Holger, Förstner, Konrad U, Grigorov, Ivo, Hériché, Jean-Karim, Lahti, Leo, MacLean, Dan, Markie, Michael L, Molloy, Jenny, Schneider, Maria Victoria, Scott, Camille, Smith-Unna, Richard, Vieira, Bruno Miguel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000Research 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4304228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25653839
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.5686.2
_version_ 1782354060303663104
author Aleksic, Jelena
Alexa, Adrian
Attwood, Teresa K
Chue Hong, Neil
Dahlö, Martin
Davey, Robert
Dinkel, Holger
Förstner, Konrad U
Grigorov, Ivo
Hériché, Jean-Karim
Lahti, Leo
MacLean, Dan
Markie, Michael L
Molloy, Jenny
Schneider, Maria Victoria
Scott, Camille
Smith-Unna, Richard
Vieira, Bruno Miguel
author_facet Aleksic, Jelena
Alexa, Adrian
Attwood, Teresa K
Chue Hong, Neil
Dahlö, Martin
Davey, Robert
Dinkel, Holger
Förstner, Konrad U
Grigorov, Ivo
Hériché, Jean-Karim
Lahti, Leo
MacLean, Dan
Markie, Michael L
Molloy, Jenny
Schneider, Maria Victoria
Scott, Camille
Smith-Unna, Richard
Vieira, Bruno Miguel
author_sort Aleksic, Jelena
collection PubMed
description One of the foundations of the scientific method is to be able to reproduce experiments and corroborate the results of research that has been done before. However, with the increasing complexities of new technologies and techniques, coupled with the specialisation of experiments, reproducing research findings has become a growing challenge. Clearly, scientific methods must be conveyed succinctly, and with clarity and rigour, in order for research to be reproducible. Here, we propose steps to help increase the transparency of the scientific method and the reproducibility of research results: specifically, we introduce a peer-review oath and accompanying manifesto. These have been designed to offer guidelines to enable reviewers (with the minimum friction or bias) to follow and apply open science principles, and support the ideas of transparency, reproducibility and ultimately greater societal impact. Introducing the oath and manifesto at the stage of peer review will help to check that the research being published includes everything that other researchers would need to successfully repeat the work. Peer review is the lynchpin of the publishing system: encouraging the community to consciously (and conscientiously) uphold these principles should help to improve published papers, increase confidence in the reproducibility of the work and, ultimately, provide strategic benefits to authors and their institutions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4304228
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher F1000Research
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43042282015-02-03 An Open Science Peer Review Oath Aleksic, Jelena Alexa, Adrian Attwood, Teresa K Chue Hong, Neil Dahlö, Martin Davey, Robert Dinkel, Holger Förstner, Konrad U Grigorov, Ivo Hériché, Jean-Karim Lahti, Leo MacLean, Dan Markie, Michael L Molloy, Jenny Schneider, Maria Victoria Scott, Camille Smith-Unna, Richard Vieira, Bruno Miguel F1000Res Research Note One of the foundations of the scientific method is to be able to reproduce experiments and corroborate the results of research that has been done before. However, with the increasing complexities of new technologies and techniques, coupled with the specialisation of experiments, reproducing research findings has become a growing challenge. Clearly, scientific methods must be conveyed succinctly, and with clarity and rigour, in order for research to be reproducible. Here, we propose steps to help increase the transparency of the scientific method and the reproducibility of research results: specifically, we introduce a peer-review oath and accompanying manifesto. These have been designed to offer guidelines to enable reviewers (with the minimum friction or bias) to follow and apply open science principles, and support the ideas of transparency, reproducibility and ultimately greater societal impact. Introducing the oath and manifesto at the stage of peer review will help to check that the research being published includes everything that other researchers would need to successfully repeat the work. Peer review is the lynchpin of the publishing system: encouraging the community to consciously (and conscientiously) uphold these principles should help to improve published papers, increase confidence in the reproducibility of the work and, ultimately, provide strategic benefits to authors and their institutions. F1000Research 2015-01-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4304228/ /pubmed/25653839 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.5686.2 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Aleksic J et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ Data associated with the article are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).
spellingShingle Research Note
Aleksic, Jelena
Alexa, Adrian
Attwood, Teresa K
Chue Hong, Neil
Dahlö, Martin
Davey, Robert
Dinkel, Holger
Förstner, Konrad U
Grigorov, Ivo
Hériché, Jean-Karim
Lahti, Leo
MacLean, Dan
Markie, Michael L
Molloy, Jenny
Schneider, Maria Victoria
Scott, Camille
Smith-Unna, Richard
Vieira, Bruno Miguel
An Open Science Peer Review Oath
title An Open Science Peer Review Oath
title_full An Open Science Peer Review Oath
title_fullStr An Open Science Peer Review Oath
title_full_unstemmed An Open Science Peer Review Oath
title_short An Open Science Peer Review Oath
title_sort open science peer review oath
topic Research Note
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4304228/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25653839
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.5686.2
work_keys_str_mv AT aleksicjelena anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT alexaadrian anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT attwoodteresak anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT chuehongneil anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT dahlomartin anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT daveyrobert anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT dinkelholger anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT forstnerkonradu anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT grigorovivo anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT herichejeankarim anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT lahtileo anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT macleandan anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT markiemichaell anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT molloyjenny anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT schneidermariavictoria anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT scottcamille anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT smithunnarichard anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT vieirabrunomiguel anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT anopensciencepeerreviewoath
AT aleksicjelena opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT alexaadrian opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT attwoodteresak opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT chuehongneil opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT dahlomartin opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT daveyrobert opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT dinkelholger opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT forstnerkonradu opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT grigorovivo opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT herichejeankarim opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT lahtileo opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT macleandan opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT markiemichaell opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT molloyjenny opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT schneidermariavictoria opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT scottcamille opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT smithunnarichard opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT vieirabrunomiguel opensciencepeerreviewoath
AT opensciencepeerreviewoath