Vote for my blog to get Duckies award

For those who have found this blog useful, please consider putting in your vote for an award for Online Achievement in International Studies.

Continue reading

Getting the idea of transparency all wrong

Following an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, which portrayed scientists who re-use data as parasites, we now hear more on this from Nature. Apparently, data transparency is a menace to the public. The Nature comment “Don’t let transparency damage science” claims that the research community must protect authors from harassment by replicators. The piece further infects the discussion about openness with more absurd ideas that don’t reflect reality, and it leads the discussion backwards, not forward. 
Continue reading

Tagged , ,

Don’t review articles that withhold data

Screen Shot 2016-01-16 at 19.55.22Journal editors can enforce replication policies. Authors can decide to work transparently. Most initiatives for open science and reproducibility agree that editors and authors are  are the key actors to enforce the gold standard of research integrity. However, peer-reviewers can use their leverage as well: just say you will only review an article once the author provides the data.

Continue reading

Tagged , , , ,

Reproducible Research in Biomedical Science – We’re not there yet

Screen Shot 2016-01-14 at 11.16.38A new PLoS Biol aper on reproducible research practices across the biomedical literature examines if authors provide all data, code and funding information. The results are devastating.

Continue reading

Tagged , , ,

“People like stories” A short film about reproducibility

janz replication spiegelhalterWe need mathematical help to tell the difference between a real discovery and the illusion of one. Fellow of the Royal Society and future President of the Royal Statistical Society, Sir David Spiegelhalter visits Dr Nicole Janz  to discuss reproducibility in scientific publications. Here’s the film:

Continue reading

Published articles understate the probability of type I errors

Screen Shot 2015-12-16 at 17.52.20Can we trust published articles in political science? A recent paper suggests that we should be sceptic. When comparing the published results of survey experiments with the pre-registered plans for the same study, a lot of information gets lost. 80 percent of the studies failed to report all experimental conditions and planned outcomes.

Continue reading

Tagged , , ,

How Reporting Statistical Significance Causes p-Value Hacking

P-value hacking Nicole Janz Replication BlogA new article by researchers at the University of Amsterdam shows that publication bias towards statistically significant results may cause p-value misreporting. The team examined hundreds of published articles and found that authors had reported p-values < .05 when they were in fact larger. They conclude that publication bias may incentivize researchers to misreport results.

Continue reading

Tagged ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,812 other followers