1
|
Forero DA, Curioso WH, Wang W. Ten simple rules for successfully carrying out funded research projects. PLoS Comput Biol 2024; 20:e1012431. [PMID: 39298382 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/21/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Diego A Forero
- School of Heath and Sport Sciences, Fundación Universitaria del Área Andina, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Walter H Curioso
- Vicerrectorado de Investigación, Universidad Continental, Lima, Peru
| | - Wei Wang
- Clinical Research Centre, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, China
- School of Public Health, Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, Shandong, China
- Beijing Key Laboratory of Clinical Epidemiology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
- Centre for Precision Health, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Purgar M, Glasziou P, Klanjscek T, Nakagawa S, Culina A. Supporting study registration to reduce research waste. Nat Ecol Evol 2024; 8:1391-1399. [PMID: 38839851 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-024-02433-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2023] [Accepted: 05/08/2024] [Indexed: 06/07/2024]
Abstract
An estimated 82-89% of ecological research and 85% of medical research has limited or no value to the end user because of various inefficiencies. We argue that registration and registered reports can enhance the quality and impact of ecological research. Drawing on evidence from other fields, chiefly medicine, we support our claim that registration can reduce research waste. However, increasing registration rates, quality and impact will be very slow without coordinated effort of funders, publishers and research institutions. We therefore call on them to facilitate the adoption of registration by providing adequate support. We outline several aspects to be considered when designing a registration system that would best serve the field of ecology. To further inform the development of such a system, we call for more research to identify the causes of low registration rates in ecology. We suggest short- and long-term actions to bolster registration and reduce research waste.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Paul Glasziou
- Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
| | | | - Shinichi Nakagawa
- Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Theoretical Sciences Visiting Program, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Onna, Japan
| | - Antica Culina
- Ruđer Bošković Institute, Zagreb, Croatia.
- Netherlands Institute of Ecology, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Albright TD, Scurich N. A call for open science in forensics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2024; 121:e2321809121. [PMID: 38781227 PMCID: PMC11181113 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2321809121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/25/2024] Open
Abstract
The modern canon of open science consists of five "schools of thought" that justify unfettered access to the fruits of scientific research: i) public engagement, ii) democratic right of access, iii) efficiency of knowledge gain, iv) shared technology, and v) better assessment of impact. Here, we introduce a sixth school: due process. Due process under the law includes a right to "discovery" by a defendant of potentially exculpatory evidence held by the prosecution. When such evidence is scientific, due process becomes a Constitutional mandate for open science. To illustrate the significance of this new school, we present a case study from forensics, which centers on a federally funded investigation that reports summary statistics indicating that identification decisions made by forensic firearms examiners are highly accurate. Because of growing concern about validity of forensic methods, the larger scientific community called for public release of the complete analyzable dataset for independent audit and verification. Those in possession of the data opposed release for three years while summary statistics were used by prosecutors to gain admissibility of evidence in criminal trials. Those statistics paint an incomplete picture and hint at flaws in experimental design and analysis. Under the circumstances, withholding the underlying data in a criminal proceeding violates due process. Following the successful open-science model of drug validity testing through "clinical trials," which place strict requirements on experimental design and timing of data release, we argue for registered and open "forensic trials" to ensure transparency and accountability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nicholas Scurich
- Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, CA92697
- Department of Criminology, Law and Society, University of California, Irvine, CA92697
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Norris E, O’Mahony A, Coyne R, Varol T, Green JA, Reynolds J, Toomey E. Demystifying Open Science in health psychology and behavioral medicine: a practical guide to Registered Reports and Data Notes. Health Psychol Behav Med 2024; 12:2351939. [PMID: 38817594 PMCID: PMC11138224 DOI: 10.1080/21642850.2024.2351939] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2024] [Accepted: 04/28/2024] [Indexed: 06/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Open Science practices are integral to increasing transparency, reproducibility, and accessibility of research in health psychology and behavioral medicine. Drives to facilitate Open Science practices are becoming increasingly evident in journal editorial policies, including the establishment of new paper formats such as Registered Reports and Data Notes. This paper provides: (i) an overview of the current state of Open Science policies within health psychology and behavioral medicine, (ii) a call for submissions to an Article Collection of Registered Reports and Data Notes as new paper formats within the journal of Health Psychology & Behavioral Medicine, (iii) an overview of Registered Reports and Data Notes, and (iv) practical considerations for authors and reviewers of Registered Reports and Data Notes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Norris
- Department of Health Sciences, Brunel University London, London, UK
| | | | - Rory Coyne
- School of Psychology, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - Tugce Varol
- Public Engagement and Science Communication Group, Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - James A. Green
- Physical Activity for Health Research Centre, Health Research Institute (HRI) and School of Allied Health, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | | | - Elaine Toomey
- Centre for Health Research Methodology, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Syed M, Frank MC, Roisman GI. Registered Reports in Child Development: Introduction to the Special Section. Child Dev 2023; 94:1093-1101. [PMID: 37603615 DOI: 10.1111/cdev.14003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 08/04/2023] [Indexed: 08/23/2023]
Abstract
Registered Reports (RRs) are an emerging format for publishing empirical journal articles in which the decision to publish an article is based on sound conceptualization, methods, and planned analyses rather than the specific nature of the results. This article introduces the Special Section on Registered Reports in Child Development by describing what RRs are and why they are necessary, outlining the thought process that guided the Special Section, describing key thematic insights across the eight articles included in the collection, and providing recommendations for developmental researchers interested in publishing via the RR format. This article also serves as a formal announcement that RRs will be a standard publishing option at Child Development, effective immediately.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Moin Syed
- Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Michael C Frank
- Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA
| | - Glenn I Roisman
- Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Botvinik-Nezer R, Wager TD. Reproducibility in Neuroimaging Analysis: Challenges and Solutions. BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY. COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE AND NEUROIMAGING 2023; 8:780-788. [PMID: 36906444 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2022.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Revised: 11/27/2022] [Accepted: 12/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Recent years have marked a renaissance in efforts to increase research reproducibility in psychology, neuroscience, and related fields. Reproducibility is the cornerstone of a solid foundation of fundamental research-one that will support new theories built on valid findings and technological innovation that works. The increased focus on reproducibility has made the barriers to it increasingly apparent, along with the development of new tools and practices to overcome these barriers. Here, we review challenges, solutions, and emerging best practices with a particular emphasis on neuroimaging studies. We distinguish 3 main types of reproducibility, discussing each in turn. Analytical reproducibility is the ability to reproduce findings using the same data and methods. Replicability is the ability to find an effect in new datasets, using the same or similar methods. Finally, robustness to analytical variability refers to the ability to identify a finding consistently across variation in methods. The incorporation of these tools and practices will result in more reproducible, replicable, and robust psychological and brain research and a stronger scientific foundation across fields of inquiry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rotem Botvinik-Nezer
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire.
| | - Tor D Wager
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Moreau D, Wiebels K. Ten simple rules for designing and conducting undergraduate replication projects. PLoS Comput Biol 2023; 19:e1010957. [PMID: 36928436 PMCID: PMC10019630 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010957] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Conducting a replication study is a valuable way for undergraduate students to learn about the scientific process and gain research experience. By promoting the evaluation of existing studies to confirm their reliability, replications play a unique, though often underappreciated, role in the scientific enterprise. Involving students early in this process can help make replication mainstream among the new generation of scientists. Beyond their benefit to science, replications also provide an invaluable learning ground for students, from encouraging the development of critical thinking to emphasizing the importance of details and honing research skills. In this piece, we outline 10 simple rules for designing and conducting undergraduate replication projects, from conceptualization to implementation and dissemination. We hope that these guidelines can help educators provide students with a meaningful and constructive pedagogical experience, without compromising the scientific value of the replication project, therefore ensuring robust, valuable contributions to our understanding of the world.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Moreau
- School of Psychology and Centre for Brain Research, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Kristina Wiebels
- School of Psychology and Centre for Brain Research, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Zivony A, Kardosh R, Timmins L, Reggev N. Ten simple rules for socially responsible science. PLoS Comput Biol 2023; 19:e1010954. [PMID: 36952443 PMCID: PMC10035751 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010954] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Guidelines concerning the potentially harmful effects of scientific studies have historically focused on ethical considerations for minimizing risk for participants. However, studies can also indirectly inflict harm on individuals and social groups through how they are designed, reported, and disseminated. As evidenced by recent criticisms and retractions of high-profile studies dealing with a wide variety of social issues, there is a scarcity of resources and guidance on how one can conduct research in a socially responsible manner. As such, even motivated researchers might publish work that has negative social impacts due to a lack of awareness. To address this, we propose 10 simple rules for researchers who wish to conduct socially responsible science. These rules, which cover major considerations throughout the life cycle of a study from inception to dissemination, are not aimed as a prescriptive list or a deterministic code of conduct. Rather, they are meant to help motivated scientists to reflect on their social responsibility as researchers and actively engage with the potential social impact of their research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alon Zivony
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
| | - Rasha Kardosh
- Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, United States of America
| | - Liadh Timmins
- School of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences, Swansea University, Swansea, Wales, United Kingdom
| | - Niv Reggev
- Department of Psychology, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be'er-Sheva, Israel
- School of Brain Sciences and Cognition, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be'er-Sheva, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
McIntosh RD, Della Sala S. An industrious revolution: Chris Chambers' contribution to Cortex. Cortex 2023; 159:313-316. [PMID: 36702674 DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2023.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2023] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Robert D McIntosh
- Human Cognitive Neuroscience, Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
| | - Sergio Della Sala
- Human Cognitive Neuroscience, Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|