As of this year, Revista DADOS will have an editorial department specifically set up to deal with issues of the replicability of its articles. This commitment included a break with essayism in favor of a more systematic research view, which led to the publication of manuscripts strongly supported by empirical evidence. … Read More →
Reproduction and replication in scientific research – part 3
Reproducibility and replicability are central issues when discussing the reliability of scientific research. The attempt by a second researcher to replicate a previous study is an effort to determine whether applying the same methods to the same scientific question produces similar results. In the social sciences and humanities, however, it is not the same paradigms. … Read More →
Reproduction and replication in scientific research – part 2
In this second note on the subject, we will address the guidelines proposed in 2019 by NASEM. We will analyze how replicability is understood in different scientific disciplines, mainly in the experimental sciences, based on a computational paradigm. Likewise, we will look at opinions from other disciplines related to social sciences and medicine, which do not participate in the same epistemological paradigms. … Read More →
Reproduction and replication in scientific research – part 1
Replicability is a central issue when discussing the reliability of scientific research that renews itself in the promotion of open science. A second researcher’s attempt to replicate an earlier study is an effort to determine whether applying the same methods to the same scientific question yields similar results. … Read More →
Shuffle the cards and deal again
Research must be well planned, carried out correctly and reported in a clear and transparent way, as the reliability of the results depends on the rigor of the experimental design. However, in the published reports, there seems to be a lack of commitment by those responsible for assessing the quality of the research. Experts pointed out that the current incentive structures in research institutions do not sufficiently encourage researchers to invest in solidity and transparency, instead encouraging them to optimize their aptitude in the fight for publications and grants. Over the past decade, large-scale replication studies have shown that reproducibility is far from favorable in many scientific fields, and questionable research practices are becoming more prevalent. Clearly something is not working in the scientific enterprise. … Read More →
Open Science in the Humanities
Following the event Open Science in the Humanities, organized by SciELO in partnership with the representatives of the area in the Advisory Committee, Luiz Augusto Campos and Bernardo Buarque de Hollanda, a brief description and balance of the main thematic axes debated was made, emphasizing at the end the importance of dialogue between the editors of the different subareas, establishing interchanges, elucidating doubts and highlighting strengths and weaknesses in the challenges of implementing open science, according to the consideration of the specificities and diversity of the contemplated journals. … Read More →
Publishers and FAIR data
In this post a proposal is introduced for academic publishing outfits to encourage and enable authors to make their articles — and where possible the underlying datasets — semantically unambiguous so that they can be communicated as FAIR data (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable). The proposal is described in-depth in a published open access article, to which a link is provided in the post. … Read More →
The path to reproducibility tests is through Registered Reports
The need to reproduce research results for the sake of science transparency and credibility goes through numerous challenges. An article published in Nature indicates that, in order to obtain better results from reproducibility tests, it is important to establish protocols in agreement with the authors of the original study and to align expectations. Registered Reports, submitted to peer review before the experimental stage of the study, present themselves as a promising solution for successful reproducibility tests. … Read More →
Sorbonne declaration on research data rights [Originally published in the LERU website in January/2020]
The opening of research data is one of the practices of open science that is progressively being globalized. In November 2019, the Network of Scientific Data Repositories of the State of São Paulo, formed by eight universities and research institutions, was launched. In January 2020, leaders of eight university networks gathered at the International Research Data Rights Summit at Sorbonne Université signed the Sorbonne Declaration on Research Data Rights, which is reproduced in this post in the original English version. … Read More →
Promoting and accelerating research data sharing
The State of Open Data 2018 report surveyed researchers from all continents on the motives, habits, knowledge, and practices of data sharing. The results, compared to the 2016 and 2017 reports, provide relevant information on the evolution of open research data around the world as well as how to strengthen this practice in academia so that it achieves the expected results. … Read More →
SciELO Indexing Criteria align with open science communication
The new SciELO Brazil Criteria are aligned with the good practices of open science communication. They become valid from January 2018 and project a new stage of improvement of Brazil’s scientific communication, which should be progressively extended to the other countries of the SciELO Network. The advancement towards open science has as a characteristic the repositioning of the main players of scholarly communication: authors, journals, and research funders. … Read More →
Collaboration and concerted action are key to making open data a reality [Originally published in LSE Impact of Social Sciences blog in October/2017]
The case for open data is increasingly inarguable. Improved data practice can help to address concerns about reproducibility and research integrity, reducing fraud and improving patient outcomes, for example. Research also shows good data practice can lead to improved productivity and increased citations. However, as Grace Baynes reports, recent survey data shows that while the research community recognises the value of open data, uptake remains slow, with good data practice and data sharing far from the status quo. To effect change, government, funders, institutions, publishers, and researchers themselves all have an important role to play. … Read More →
A statistical fix for the replication crisis in science [Originally published in The Conversation in October/2017]
How should we evaluate initial claims of a scientific discovery? Here’s is a new idea: Only P-values less than 0.005 should be considered statistically significant. P-values between 0.005 and 0.05 should merely be called suggestive, but statistical significance should not serve as a bright-line threshold for publication. … Read More →
Assessment of reproducibility in research results leads to more questions than answers
The ‘Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology’ initiative that has the purpose of assessing the reproducibility of preclinical research in Oncology was launched in 2013 as the result of a collaboration between the Center for Open Science and Science Exchange. The first results of the replication studies have just been published, however, their interpretation requires a careful approach. … Read More →
Is the reproducibility crisis exacerbated by pre-publication peer review?
A lack of scrutiny of articles published in peer-reviewed journals on the basis of a belief that pre-publication peer-review provides sufficient scrutiny, may well add to the relatively high number of articles in which results are presented that cannot be replicated. … Read More →
Recent Comments