The role of results in deciding to publish: A direct comparison across authors, reviewers, and editors based on an online survey

BACKGROUND

Publishing study results in scientific journals has been the standard way of disseminating science. However, getting results published may depend on their statistical significance. The consequence of this is that the representation of scientific knowledge might be biased. This type of bias has been called publication bias. The main objective of the present study is to get more insight into publication bias by examining it at the author, reviewer, and editor level. Additionally, we make a direct comparison between publication bias induced by authors, by reviewers, and by editors. We approached our participants by e-mail, asking them to fill out an online survey.

RESULTS

Our findings suggest that statistically significant findings have a higher likelihood to be published than statistically non-significant findings, because (1) authors (n = 65) are more likely to write up and submit articles with significant results compared to articles with non-significant results (median effect size 1.10, BF10 = 1.09*107); (2) reviewers (n = 60) give more favourable reviews to articles with significant results compared to articles with non-significant results (median effect size 0.58, BF10 = 4.73*102); and (3) editors (n = 171) are more likely to accept for publication articles with significant results compared to articles with non-significant results (median effect size, 0.94, BF10 = 7.63*107). Evidence on differences in the relative contributions to publication bias by authors, reviewers, and editors is ambiguous (editors vs reviewers: BF10 = 0.31, reviewers vs authors: BF10 = 3.11, and editors vs authors: BF10 = 0.42).

DISCUSSION

One of the main limitations was that rather than investigating publication bias directly, we studied potential for publication bias. Another limitation was the low response rate to the survey.

Predicting and reasoning about replicability using structured groups

This paper explores judgements about the replicability of social and behavioural sciences research and what drives those judgements. Using a mixed methods approach, it draws on qualitative and quantitative data elicited from groups using a structured approach called the IDEA protocol ('investigate', 'discuss', 'estimate' and 'aggregate'). Five groups of five people with relevant domain expertise evaluated 25 research claims that were subject to at least one replication study. Participants assessed the probability that each of the 25 research claims would replicate (i.e. that a replication study would find a statistically significant result in the same direction as the original study) and described the reasoning behind those judgements. We quantitatively analysed possible correlates of predictive accuracy, including self-rated expertise and updating of judgements after feedback and discussion. We qualitatively analysed the reasoning data to explore the cues, heuristics and patterns of reasoning used by participants. Participants achieved 84% classification accuracy in predicting replicability. Those who engaged in a greater breadth of reasoning provided more accurate replicability judgements. Some reasons were more commonly invoked by more accurate participants, such as 'effect size' and 'reputation' (e.g. of the field of research). There was also some evidence of a relationship between statistical literacy and accuracy.

Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study

Background

The probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent for esophagogastric cancer has been shown to vary considerately between hospitals of diagnosis. Little is known about the factors that attribute to this variation. Since clinical decision making (CDM) partially takes place during an MDTM, the aim of this qualitative study was to assess clinician’s perspectives regarding facilitators and barriers associated with CDM during MDTM, and second, to identify factors associated with CDM during an MDTM that may potentially explain differences in hospital practice.

Methods

A multiple case study design was conducted. The thematic content analysis of this qualitative study, focused on 16 MDTM observations, 30 semi-structured interviews with clinicians and seven focus groups with clinicians to complement the collected data. Interviews were transcribed ad verbatim and coded.

Results

Factors regarding team dynamics that were raised as aspects attributing to CDM were clinician’s personal characteristics such as ambition and the intention to be innovative. Clinician’s convictions regarding a certain treatment and its outcomes and previous experiences with treatment outcomes, and team dynamics within the MDTM influenced CDM. In addition, a continuum was illustrated. At one end of the continuum, teams tended to be more conservative, following the guidelines more strictly, versus the opposite in which hospitals tended towards a more invasive approach maximizing the probability of curation.

Conclusion

This study contributes to the awareness that variation in team dynamics influences CDM during an MDTM.

Exploring Construct and Consequential Validity of Collaborative Learning Assessment in Higher Education

Despite the advance of collaborative learning in higher education, there is a tension between its assessment and the orientation on students’ individual domain-specific abilities (e.g., knowledge and/or skills) of most higher education curricula. We examined the construct and consequential validity of group assessment, individual assessment, and combined assessment of collaborative learning. Findings showed that the construct and consequential validity of these assessment methods can vary widely within and across cohorts. In view of these findings and considering pragmatic and didactic considerations, combined assessment of collaborative learning might be better suited than group assessment and individual assessment of collaborative learning.

SampleSizePlanner: A Tool to Estimate and Justify Sample Size for Two-Group Studies

Planning sample size often requires researchers to identify a statistical technique and to make several choices during their calculations. Currently, there is a lack of clear guidelines for researchers to find and use the applicable procedure. In the present tutorial, we introduce a web app and R package that offer nine different procedures to determine and justify the sample size for independent two-group study designs. The application highlights the most important decision points for each procedure and suggests example justifications for them. The resulting sample-size report can serve as a template for preregistrations and manuscripts.

Cross-calibration of a combined electrostatic and time-of-flight analyzer for energy- and charge-state-resolved spectrometry of tin laser-produced plasma

We present the results of the calibration of a channeltron-based electrostatic analyzer operating in time-of-flight mode (ESA-ToF) using tin ions resulting from laser-produced plasma, over a wide range of charge states and energies. Specifically, the channeltron electron multiplier detection efficiency and the spectrometer resolution are calibrated, and count rate effects are characterized. With the obtained overall response function, the ESA-ToF is shown to accurately reproduce charge-integrated measurements separately and simultaneously obtained from a Faraday cup (FC), up to a constant factor the finding of which enables absolute cross-calibration of the ESA-ToF using the FC as an absolute benchmark. Absolute charge-state-resolved ion energy distributions are obtained from ns-pulse Nd:YAG-laser-produced microdroplet tin plasmas in a setting relevant for state-of-the-art extreme ultraviolet nanolithography.

Aspiring to greater intellectual humility in science

The replication crisis in the social, behavioural and life sciences has spurred a reform movement aimed at increasing the credibility of scientific studies. Many of these credibility-enhancing reforms focus, appropriately, on specific research and publication practices. A less often mentioned aspect of credibility is the need for intellectual humility or being transparent about and owning the limitations of our work. Although intellectual humility is presented as a widely accepted scientific norm, we argue that current research practice does not incentivize intellectual humility. We provide a set of recommendations on how to increase intellectual humility in research articles and highlight the central role peer reviewers can play in incentivizing authors to foreground the flaws and uncertainty in their work, thus enabling full and transparent evaluation of the validity of research.

Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

Any large dataset can be analyzed in a number of ways, and it is possible that the use of different analysis strategies will lead to different results and conclusions. One way to assess whether the results obtained depend on the analysis strategy chosen is to employ multiple analysts and leave each of them free to follow their own approach. Here, we present consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting such multi-analyst studies, and we discuss how broader adoption of the multi-analyst approach has the potential to strengthen the robustness of results and conclusions obtained from analyses of datasets in basic and applied research.

The Role of Human Fallibility in Psychological Research: A Survey of Mistakes in Data Management

Errors are an inevitable consequence of human fallibility, and researchers are no exception. Most researchers can recall major frustrations or serious time delays due to human errors while collecting, analyzing, or reporting data. The present study is an exploration of mistakes made during the data-management process in psychological research. We surveyed 488 researchers regarding the type, frequency, seriousness, and outcome of mistakes that have occurred in their research team during the last 5 years. The majority of respondents suggested that mistakes occurred with very low or low frequency. Most respondents reported that the most frequent mistakes led to insignificant or minor consequences, such as time loss or frustration. The most serious mistakes caused insignificant or minor consequences for about a third of respondents, moderate consequences for almost half of respondents, and major or extreme consequences for about one fifth of respondents. The most frequently reported types of mistakes were ambiguous naming/defining of data, version control error, and wrong data processing/analysis. Most mistakes were reportedly due to poor project preparation or management and/or personal difficulties (physical or cognitive constraints). With these initial exploratory findings, we do not aim to provide a description representative for psychological scientists but, rather, to lay the groundwork for a systematic investigation of human fallibility in research data management and the development of solutions to reduce errors and mitigate their impact.

When numbers fail: do researchers agree on operationalization of published research?

Current discussions on improving the reproducibility of science often revolve around statistical innovations. However, equally important for improving methodological rigour is a valid operationalization of phenomena. Operationalization is the process of translating theoretical constructs into measurable laboratory quantities. Thus, the validity of operationalization is central for the quality of empirical studies. But do differences in the validity of operationalization affect the way scientists evaluate scientific literature? To investigate this, we manipulated the strength of operationalization of three published studies and sent them to researchers via email. In the first task, researchers were presented with a summary of the Method and Result section from one of the studies and were asked to guess the hypothesis that was investigated via a multiple-choice questionnaire. In a second task, researchers were asked to rate the perceived quality of the study. Our results show that (1) researchers are better at inferring the underlying research question from empirical results if the operationalization is more valid, but (2) the different validity is only to some extent reflected in a judgement of the study's quality. These results combined give partial corroboration to the notion that researchers' evaluations of research results are not affected by operationalization validity.

How best to quantify replication success? A simulation study on the comparison of replication success metrics

To overcome the frequently debated crisis of confidence, replicating studies is becoming increasingly more common. Multiple frequentist and Bayesian measures have been proposed to evaluate whether a replication is successful, but little is known about which method best captures replication success. This study is one of the first attempts to compare a number of quantitative measures of replication success with respect to their ability to draw the correct inference when the underlying truth is known, while taking publication bias into account. Our results show that Bayesian metrics seem to slightly outperform frequentist metrics across the board. Generally, meta-analytic approaches seem to slightly outperform metrics that evaluate single studies, except in the scenario of extreme publication bias, where this pattern reverses.

Bayesian Frequentists: Examining the Paradox Between What Researchers Can Conclude Versus What They Want to Conclude From Statistical Results

A majority of statistically educated scientists draw incorrect conclusions based on the most commonly used statistical technique: null hypothesis significance testing (NHST). Frequentist techniques are often claimed to be incorrectly interpreted as Bayesian outcomes, which suggests that a Bayesian framework may fit better to inferences researchers frequently want to make (Briggs, 2012). The current study set out to test this proposition. Firstly, we investigated whether there is a discrepancy between what researchers think they can conclude and what they want to be able to conclude from NHST. Secondly, we investigated to what extent researchers want to incorporate prior study results and their personal beliefs in their statistical inference. Results show the expected discrepancy between what researchers think they can conclude from NHST and what they want to be able to conclude. Furthermore, researchers were interested in incorporating prior study results, but not their personal beliefs, into their statistical inference.

Extreme ultraviolet light from a tin plasma driven by a 2-µm-wavelength laser

An experimental study of laser-produced plasmas is performed by irradiating a planar tin target by laser pulses, of 4.8 ns duration, produced from a KTP-based 2-µm-wavelength master oscillator power amplifier. Comparative spectroscopic investigations are performed for plasmas driven by 1-µm- and 2-µm-wavelength pulsed lasers, over a wide range of laser intensities spanning 0.5 - 5 × 10¹¹ W/cm ². Similar extreme ultraviolet (EUV) spectra in the 5.5-25.5 nm wavelength range and underlying plasma ionicities are obtained when the intensity ratio is kept fixed at I_1µm/I_2µm = 2.4(7). Crucially, the conversion efficiency (CE) of 2-µm-laser energy into radiation within a 2% bandwidth centered at 13.5 nm relevant for industrial applications is found to be a factor of two larger, at a 60 degree observation angle, than in the case of the denser 1-µm-laser-driven plasma. Our findings regarding the scaling of the optimum laser intensity for efficient EUV generation and CE with drive laser wavelength are extended to other laser wavelengths using available literature data.

Journal policies and editors' opinions on peer review

Peer review practices differ substantially between journals and disciplines. This study presents the results of a survey of 322 editors of journals in ecology, economics, medicine, physics and psychology. We found that 49% of the journals surveyed checked all manuscripts for plagiarism, that 61% allowed authors to recommend both for and against specific reviewers, and that less than 6% used a form of open peer review. Most journals did not have an official policy on altering reports from reviewers, but 91% of editors identified at least one situation in which it was appropriate for an editor to alter a report. Editors were also asked for their views on five issues related to publication ethics. A majority expressed support for co-reviewing, reviewers requesting access to data, reviewers recommending citations to their work, editors publishing in their own journals, and replication studies. Our results provide a window into what is largely an opaque aspect of the scientific process. We hope the findings will inform the debate about the role and transparency of peer review in scholarly publishing.

Time- and space-resolved optical Stark spectroscopy in the afterglow of laser-produced tin-droplet plasma

The afterglow emission from Nd:YAG-laser-produced microdroplet-tin plasma is investigated, with a focus on analyzing Stark effect phenomena and the dynamical evolution of the plasma. Time- and space-resolved optical imaging spectroscopy is performed on 11 lines from Sn i-iv ions, in the 315-425-nm wavelength range. Stark shift-to-width ratios serve as the basis for unambiguous experimental tests of atomic physics theory predictions. Experiment and theory, where available, are found to be in poor agreement, and are in disagreement regarding the sign of the ratio in several cases. Spectroscopic measurements of the Stark widths in tandem with Saha-Boltzmann fits to Sn i and Sn ii lines, establish the evolution of the local temperature and density of the plasma afterglow, 20-40 ns after the end of the 15-ns-long temporally box-shaped laser pulse. A clear cool-down from ∼2 to 1 eV is observed of the plasma in this time window, having started at ∼30 eV when emitting extreme-ultraviolet (EUV) light. An exponential reduction of the density of the plasma from ∼10^{18}-10^{17}e^{-} cm^{-3} is observed in this same time window. Our work is relevant for understanding the dynamics of the decaying, expanding plasma in state-of-the-art EUV nanolithography machines.

Prominent radiative contributions from multiply-excited states in laser-produced tin plasma for nanolithography

Extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography is currently entering high-volume manufacturing to enable the continued miniaturization of semiconductor devices. The required EUV light, at 13.5 nm wavelength, is produced in a hot and dense laser-driven tin plasma. The atomic origins of this light are demonstrably poorly understood. Here we calculate detailed tin opacity spectra using the Los Alamos atomic physics suite ATOMIC and validate these calculations with experimental comparisons. Our key finding is that EUV light largely originates from transitions between multiply-excited states, and not from the singly-excited states decaying to the ground state as is the current paradigm. Moreover, we find that transitions between these multiply-excited states also contribute in the same narrow window around 13.5 nm as those originating from singly-excited states, and this striking property holds over a wide range of charge states. We thus reveal the doubly magic behavior of tin and the origins of the EUV light.

Extreme ultraviolet (EUV) light is entering use in nanolithography. Here the authors discuss experimental and theoretical results about the prominent role of multiply-excited states in highly charged tin ions in the mechanism of EUV light emission from laser-produced plasma.

The effect of preregistration on trust in empirical research findings: results of a registered report

The crisis of confidence has undermined the trust that researchers place in the findings of their peers. In order to increase trust in research, initiatives such as preregistration have been suggested, which aim to prevent various questionable research practices. As it stands, however, no empirical evidence exists that preregistration does increase perceptions of trust. The picture may be complicated by a researcher's familiarity with the author of the study, regardless of the preregistration status of the research. This registered report presents an empirical assessment of the extent to which preregistration increases the trust of 209 active academics in the reported outcomes, and how familiarity with another researcher influences that trust. Contrary to our expectations, we report ambiguous Bayes factors and conclude that we do not have strong evidence towards answering our research questions. Our findings are presented along with evidence that our manipulations were ineffective for many participants, leading to the exclusion of 68% of complete datasets, and an underpowered design as a consequence. We discuss other limitations and confounds which may explain why the findings of the study deviate from a previously conducted pilot study. We reflect on the benefits of using the registered report submission format in light of our results. The OSF page for this registered report and its pilot can be found here: http://dx.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/B3K75.

When and Why to Replicate: As Easy as 1, 2, 3?

The crisis of confidence in psychology has prompted vigorous and persistent debate in the scientific community concerning the veracity of the findings of psychological experiments. This discussion has led to changes in psychology’s approach to research, and several new initiatives have been developed, many with the aim of improving our findings. One key advancement is the marked increase in the number of replication studies conducted. We argue that while it is important to conduct replications as part of regular research protocol, it is neither efficient nor useful to replicate results at random. We recommend adopting a methodical approach toward the selection of replication targets to maximize the impact of the outcomes of those replications, and minimize waste of scarce resources. In the current study, we demonstrate how a Bayesian re–analysis of existing research findings followed by a simple qualitative assessment process can drive the selection of the best candidate article for replication.

Literature practices: processes leading up to a citation

Purpose

Literature practices represent the process leading up to the citation of a source, and consist of the selection, reading and citing of sources. The purpose of this paper is to explore possible factors that might influence researchers during this process and discover possible consequences of researchers’ citation behaviours.

Design/methodology/approach

In this exploratory study, various factors which could influence literature practices were explored via a questionnaire amongst 112 researchers. Participants were first authors of articles published in 2016 in one of five different journals within the disciplines of experimental psychology, educational sciences and social psychology. Academic positions of the participants ranged from PhD student to full professor.

Findings

Frequencies and percentages showed that researchers seemed to be influenced in their literature practices by various factors, such as editors suggesting articles and motivation to cite. Additionally, a high percentage of researchers reported taking shortcuts when citing articles (e.g. using secondary citations and reading selectively). Logistic regression did not reveal a clear relationship between academic work experience and research practices.

Practical implications

Seeing that researchers seem to be influenced by a variety of factors in their literature practices, the scientific community might benefit from better citation practices and guidelines in order to provide more structure to the process of literature practices.

Originality/value

This paper provides first insights into researchers’ literature practices. Possible reasons for problems with citation accuracy and replicating research findings are highlighted. Opportunities for further research on the topic of citation behaviours are presented.

Do Researchers Anchor Their Beliefs on the Outcome of an Initial Study?

As a research field expands, scientists have to update their knowledge and integrate the outcomes of a sequence of studies. However, such integrative judgments are generally known to fall victim to a primacy bias where people anchor their judgments on the initial information. In this preregistered study we tested the hypothesis that people anchor on the outcome of a small initial study, reducing the impact of a larger subsequent study that contradicts the initial result. Contrary to our expectation, undergraduates and academics displayed a recency bias, anchoring their judgment on the research outcome presented last. This recency bias is due to the fact that unsuccessful replications decreased trust in an effect more than did unsuccessful initial experiments. We recommend the time-reversal heuristic to account for temporal order effects during integration of research results.

Monitoring of patients treated with lithium for bipolar disorder: an international survey

Background

Adequate monitoring of patients using lithium is needed for optimal dosing and for early identification of patients with (potential) ADEs. The objective was to internationally assess how health care professionals monitor patients treated with lithium for bipolar disorder.

Methods

Using networks of various professional organizations, an anonymous online survey was conducted among health care professionals prescribing lithium. Target lithium serum levels and frequency of monitoring was assessed together with monitoring of physical and laboratory parameters. Reasons to and not to monitor and use of guidelines and institutional protocols, and local monitoring systems were investigated.

Results

The survey was completed by 117 health care professionals incorporating responses from twenty-four countries. All prescribers reported to monitor lithium serum levels on a regular basis, with varying target ranges. Almost all (> 97%) monitored thyroid and renal function before start and during maintenance treatment. Reported monitoring of other laboratory and physical parameters was variable. The majority of respondents (74%) used guidelines or institutional protocols for monitoring. In general, the prescriber was responsible for monitoring, had to request every monitoring parameter separately and only a minority of patients was automatically invited.

Conclusions

Lithium serum levels, renal and thyroid function were monitored by (almost) all physicians. However, there was considerable variation in other monitoring parameters. Our results help to understand why prescribers of lithium monitor patients and what their main reasons are not to monitor patients using lithium.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40345-018-0120-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Incidence of incontinence after radical prostatectomy using claims-based data]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of radical prostatectomy (RP) hospital volume on the probability of post-RP incontinence.

DESIGN

Retrospective research based on claims-based data of health insurers.

METHOD

For every patient with RP the probability of incontinence was determined, based on the definition of claims of one or more incontinence pads per day. Casemix corrections were made based on indicators available in claims-data: age, lymph node dissection, and radiotherapy. No casemix corrections could be made for tumour stage and surgical technique.

RESULTS

A total of 1590 patients were included in this study; for 26.0% of these patients, an average of one or more incontinence pads per day were claimed for. A significant relation between the volume of RP per hospital and the claims of incontinence material was observed. The probability of incontinence was significantly lower in hospitals with a volume of more than 100 RP patients per year when compared to hospitals with less than 100 RP patients per year.

CONCLUSION

The probability of post-RP incontinence decreases as hospitals conduct more RP procedures. The casemix factors included in the analysis only had a limited impact on this observation.

[Bipolar disorder and alcohol use disorder: practical recommendations for treatment, based on a literature review]

A fairly large proportion (25-50%) of patients with bipolar disorder (bd) also suffer from comorbid alcohol use disorder (aud). However, little is known how this type of morbidity should be treated. It is also unclear whether the current guidelines on bd have been influenced by aud.<br/> AIM: To provide an overview of recent literature concerning the diagnosis and treatment of comorbid bd and aud.<br/> METHOD: We systematically reviewed studies that have addressed three treatment options for this group of patients: pharmaco-therapy, psychological interventions and self-management techniques.<br/> RESULTS: If health professionals decide to treat bd using a pharmaco-therapeutic intervention, they must proceed with caution because the patient may also be suffering from aud. From the very limited number of published articles on this subject, we conclude that the best solution to the problem is to add valproate to the lithium-based treatment. There is also limited evidence that other effective treatments may include the use of integrated psychological interventions, cognitive behavioural therapy and self-management techniques, but these possibilities need further investigation.<br/> CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients suffering from both bd and aud should always focus on both disorders, either simultaneously or separately. If this approach is successful it is vitally important that care is better organised and that there is cooperation between institutions involved in treating addiction disorders and departments that specialise in the care of bd. These improvements are likely to lead to further developments and to more research into new forms of integrated treatment.

Subnormothermic Preservation Maintains Viability and Function in a Porcine Hepatocyte Culture Model Simulating Bioreactor Transport

Bioartificial liver (BAL) systems have been developed to bridge patients with acute liver failure (ALF) to liver transplantation or liver regeneration. Clinical application of BAL systems is dependent on the supportive quality of cells used and direct availability of the whole system. Reliable transport of BAL systems from the laboratory to remote treatment centers is therefore inevitable. Subsequently, preservation conditions play a crucial role during transport of a BAL, with temperature being one of the most determining factors. In this study, we assessed the effect of subnormothermic preservation on freshly isolated porcine hepatocytes cultured in monolayer under oxygenation. Additionally, the effect of the University of Wisconsin (UW) preservation solution was compared with Williams' E (WE) culture medium at 4°C. The control group was cultured for 3 days at 37°C, whereas the transport groups were cultured at 4°C, 15°C, 21°C, or 28°C for 24 h at day 2. All groups were tested each day for cell damage and hepatic functions. Subnormothermic culture (i.e., 15°C to 28°C) for a period of 24 h did not reduce any hepatic function and did not increase cellular damage. In contrast, culture of hepatocytes in WE medium and preservation in UW solution at 4°C significantly reduced hepatic function. In conclusion, freshly isolated porcine hepatocytes can be preserved for 24 h at subnormothermic temperatures as low as 15°C. Future research will focus on the implementation of the AMC-BAL in an oxygenated culture medium perfusion system for transport between the laboratory and the hospital.

Academic textbooks [corrected] on ADHD genetics: balanced or biased?

Academic text books [corrected] are essential assets for disseminating knowledge about ADHD to future healthcare professionals. This study examined if they are balanced with regard to genetics. We selected and analyzed study books (N=43) used in (pre) master's programmes at 10 universities in the Netherlands. Because the mere behaviourally informed quantitative genetics give a much higher effect size of the genetic involvement in ADHD, it is important that text books [corrected] contrast these findings with molecular genetics' outcomes. The latter studies use real genetic data, and their low effect sizes expose the potential weaknesses of quantitative genetics, like underestimating the involvement of the environment. Only a quarter of books mention both effect sizes and contrast these findings, while another quarter does not discuss any effect size. Most importantly, however, roughly half of the books in our sample mention only the effect sizes from quantitative genetic studies without addressing the low explained variance of molecular genetic studies. This may confuse readers by suggesting that the weakly associated genes support the quite spectacular, but potentially flawed estimates of twin, family and adoption studies, while they actually contradict them.

A comparative VUV absorption mass-spectroscopy study on protonated peptides of different size

The response of gas-phase peptides upon vacuum ultraviolet absorption depends strongly on the peptide size.

Continued misinterpretation of confidence intervals: response to Miller and Ulrich

Miller and Ulrich (2015) critique our claim (Hoekstra et al., Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(5), 1157-1164, 2014), based on a survey given to researchers and students, of widespread misunderstanding of confidence intervals (CIs). They suggest that survey respondents may have interpreted the statements in the survey that we deemed incorrect in an idiosyncratic, but correct, way, thus calling into question the conclusion that the results indicate that respondents could not properly interpret CIs. Their alternative interpretations, while correct, cannot be deemed acceptable renderings of the questions in the survey due to the well-known reference class problem. Moreover, there is no support in the data for their contention that participants may have had their alternative interpretations in mind. Finally, their alternative interpretations are merely trivial restatements of the definition of a confidence interval, and have no implications for the location of a parameter.

The fallacy of placing confidence in confidence intervals

Interval estimates - estimates of parameters that include an allowance for sampling uncertainty - have long been touted as a key component of statistical analyses. There are several kinds of interval estimates, but the most popular are confidence intervals (CIs): intervals that contain the true parameter value in some known proportion of repeated samples, on average. The width of confidence intervals is thought to index the precision of an estimate; CIs are thought to be a guide to which parameter values are plausible or reasonable; and the confidence coefficient of the interval (e.g., 95 %) is thought to index the plausibility that the true parameter is included in the interval. We show in a number of examples that CIs do not necessarily have any of these properties, and can lead to unjustified or arbitrary inferences. For this reason, we caution against relying upon confidence interval theory to justify interval estimates, and suggest that other theories of interval estimation should be used instead.

Near edge X-ray absorption mass spectrometry of gas phase proteins: the influence of protein size

The response of gas-phase proteins upon soft X-ray absorption depends strongly on the proteins size.

The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: incentivizing open research practices through peer review

Openness is one of the central values of science. Open scientific practices such as sharing data, materials and analysis scripts alongside published articles have many benefits, including easier replication and extension studies, increased availability of data for theory-building and meta-analysis, and increased possibility of review and collaboration even after a paper has been published. Although modern information technology makes sharing easier than ever before, uptake of open practices had been slow. We suggest this might be in part due to a social dilemma arising from misaligned incentives and propose a specific, concrete mechanism-reviewers withholding comprehensive review-to achieve the goal of creating the expectation of open practices as a matter of scientific principle.

Deexcitation dynamics of superhydrogenated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon cations after soft-x-ray absorption

We have investigated the response of superhydrogenated gas-phase coronene cations upon soft x-ray absorption. Carbon (1s)⟶π^{⋆} transitions were resonantly excited at hν=285  eV. The resulting core hole is then filled in an Auger decay process, with the excess energy being released in the form of an Auger electron. Predominantly highly excited dications are thus formed, which cool down by hydrogen emission. In superhydrogenated systems, the additional H atoms act as a buffer, quenching loss of native H atoms and molecular fragmentation. Dissociation and transition state energies for several H loss channels were computed by means of density functional theory. Using these energies as input into an Arrhenius-type cascade model, very good agreement with the experimental data is found. The results have important implications for the survival of polyaromatic hydrocarbons in the interstellar medium and reflect key aspects of graphene hydrogenation.

Are assumptions of well-known statistical techniques checked, and why (not)?

A valid interpretation of most statistical techniques requires that one or more assumptions be met. In published articles, however, little information tends to be reported on whether the data satisfy the assumptions underlying the statistical techniques used. This could be due to self-selection: Only manuscripts with data fulfilling the assumptions are submitted. Another explanation could be that violations of assumptions are rarely checked for in the first place. We studied whether and how 30 researchers checked fictitious data for violations of assumptions in their own working environment. Participants were asked to analyze the data as they would their own data, for which often used and well-known techniques such as the t-procedure, ANOVA and regression (or non-parametric alternatives) were required. It was found that the assumptions of the techniques were rarely checked, and that if they were, it was regularly by means of a statistical test. Interviews afterward revealed a general lack of knowledge about assumptions, the robustness of the techniques with regards to the assumptions, and how (or whether) assumptions should be checked. These data suggest that checking for violations of assumptions is not a well-considered choice, and that the use of statistics can be described as opportunistic.

Length effects in VUV photofragmentation of protonated peptides

We have studied photoionization of protonated synthetic peptides YG(n)F (n = 0, 1, 3, 5, 10). Photon energies ranging from 8 to 30 eV were used. For YG(n)F peptides up to n = 5 small fragment ions related to the sidechains of the aromatic terminal amino acids Y and F dominate the fragmentation patterns. The associated yields scale with total photoabsorption cross section, demonstrating efficient hole migration towards the terminal amino acids upon photoionization of the peptide backbone. For n = 10 the side-chain loss channel is quenched and a series of large dications appear.

[Health 2.0 for psychiatrists]

BACKGROUND

The internet used to be mainly 'one-way traffic' (1.0). Nowadays it is becoming easy for internet users to communicate with each other via the web (2.0).

AIM

To describe the concept of Health 2.0 and to explore the possibilities of 2.0-technology for psychiatry.

METHOD

Information was sourced from the literature and the internet. results Health 2.0 makes it possible for patients and health professionals to exchange information on such a large scale that new knowledge is generated. This will alter the relationship between doctor and patient. Increasingly, the patient is able to take the initiative. The interactive and open character of the internet leads to new discussions and can eventually improve psychiatric care.

CONCLUSION

Health 2.0 is an important development for psychiatrists.