Category Archives: data sharing

Coding errors can be avoided

An article in the American Journal of Political Science was corrected after the coding of a political attitude variable was accidentally the wrong way around. Pre-publication cross-checks by the authors and the journal, as well as publication of the original data and variable transformations can avoid such problems.

Continue reading

Advertisements
Tagged , , ,

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 , , ,

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 ,

Political Scientists Trying to Delay Research Transparency

A group of 625 political scientists signed a petition to delay the new APSA guidelines for transparency. They want to discuss the implications for qualitative data, hand-written field notes and confidential data first. I agree that practical discussions are necessary – but this should not be a reason to abandon the transparency guidelines.
Continue reading

Tagged , , ,

Leading journal verifies articles before publication – so far, all replications failed

The American Journal of Political Science recently announced that every article will be externally verified before it is published. Authors have to provide all data, code and materials which will be verified by an external statistician. I talked to the editor William G. Jacoby about the goals of the new policy, and why no author has provided ‘perfect’ files yet.
Continue reading

Tagged , , , ,