Search Resources

3 Results

View
Selected filters:
  • Marcus R. Munafò
Current Incentives for Scientists Lead to Underpowered Studies with Erroneous Conclusions
Unrestricted Use
CC BY
Rating

We can regard the wider incentive structures that operate across science, such as the priority given to novel findings, as an ecosystem within which scientists strive to maximise their fitness (i.e., publication record and career success). Here, we develop an optimality model that predicts the most rational research strategy, in terms of the proportion of research effort spent on seeking novel results rather than on confirmatory studies, and the amount of research effort per exploratory study. We show that, for parameter values derived from the scientific literature, researchers acting to maximise their fitness should spend most of their effort seeking novel results and conduct small studies that have only 10%–40% statistical power. As a result, half of the studies they publish will report erroneous conclusions. Current incentive structures are in conflict with maximising the scientific value of research; we suggest ways that the scientific ecosystem could be improved.

Subject:
Biology
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
PLOS Biology
Author:
Andrew D. Higginson
Marcus R. Munafò
Date Added:
08/07/2020
A consensus-based transparency checklist
Unrestricted Use
CC BY
Rating

We present a consensus-based checklist to improve and document the transparency of research reports in social and behavioural research. An accompanying online application allows users to complete the form and generate a report that they can submit with their manuscript or post to a public repository.

Subject:
Psychology
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
Nature Human Behaviour
Author:
Agneta Fisher
Alexandra M. Freund
Alexandra Sarafoglou
Alice S. Carter
Andrew A. Bennett
Andrew Gelman
Balazs Aczel
Barnabas Szaszi
Benjamin R. Newell
Brendan Nyhan
Candice C. Morey
Charles Clifton
Christopher Beevers
Christopher D. Chambers
Christopher Sullivan
Cristina Cacciari
Daniel Benjamin
Daniel J. Simons
David R. Shanks
Debra Lieberman
Derek Isaacowitz
Dolores Albarracin
Don P. Green
D. Stephen Lindsay
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Eric Johnson
Eveline A. Crone
Fernando Hoces de la Guardia
Fiammetta Cosci
George C. Banks
Gordon D. Logan
Hal R. Arkes
Harold Pashler
Janet Kolodner
Jarret Crawford
Jeffrey Pollack
Jelte M. Wicherts
John Antonakis
John Curtin
John P. Ioannidis
Joseph Cesario
Kai Jonas
Lea Moersdorf
Lisa L. Harlow
Marcus Munafò
Mark Fichman
M. Gareth Gaskell
Mike Cortese
Mitja D. Back
Morton A. Gernsbacher
Nelson Cowan
Nicole D. Anderson
Pasco Fearon
Randall Engle
Robert L. Greene
Roger Giner-Sorolla
Ronán M. Conroy
Scott O. Lilienfeld
Simine Vazire
Simon Farrell
Šimon Kucharský
Stavroula Kousta
Ty W. Boyer
Wendy B. Mendes
Wiebke Bleidorn
Willem Frankenhuis
Zoltan Kekecs
Date Added:
08/07/2020
A manifesto for reproducible science
Unrestricted Use
CC BY
Rating

Improving the reliability and efficiency of scientific research will increase the credibility of the published scientific literature and accelerate discovery. Here we argue for the adoption of measures to optimize key elements of the scientific process: methods, reporting and dissemination, reproducibility, evaluation and incentives. There is some evidence from both simulations and empirical studies supporting the likely effectiveness of these measures, but their broad adoption by researchers, institutions, funders and journals will require iterative evaluation and improvement. We discuss the goals of these measures, and how they can be implemented, in the hope that this will facilitate action toward improving the transparency, reproducibility and efficiency of scientific research.

Subject:
Social Science
Material Type:
Reading
Provider:
Nature Human Behaviour
Author:
Brian A. Nosek
Christopher D. Chambers
Dorothy V. M. Bishop
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Jennifer J. Ware
John P. A. Ioannidis
Katherine S. Button
Marcus R. Munafò
Nathalie Percie du Sert
Uri Simonsohn
Date Added:
08/07/2020