Archives


In Two Decades, Will We Look Back And Wonder At All the Flawed Research?

[From the article, “Rein in the four horsemen of irreproducibility”, by Dorothy Bishop, published in Nature] “More than four decades into my scientific career, I find myself an outlier among academics of similar age and seniority: I strongly identify with…

Read More

Editor-in-Chief of Nature Wants Researchers to Make Their Data and Code Available

[From the article “Nature editor: researchers should be forced to make data public” by David Matthews, published at Times Higher Education] “The editor-in-chief of Nature has said that she would like to force researchers to make the data and code behind their…

Read More

“Retire Statistical Significance”: A Call to Join the Discussion

[From the blog “‘Retire Statistical Significance’: The discussion” by Andrew Gelman, posted at Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science] “So, the paper by Valentin Amrhein, Sander Greenland, and Blake McShane that we discussed a few weeks ago has just appeared online as…

Read More

Want to Retire Significance Testing? Sign the Petition. Deadline is Tomorrow!

[From the blog ““Abandon / Retire Statistical Significance”: Your chance to sign a petition!” by Andrew Gelman, posted at StatsBlogs] “Valentin Amrhein, Sander Greenland, and Blake McShane write:” “We have a forthcoming comment in Nature arguing that it is time…

Read More

Surveying Reproducibility

[From the article “Assessing data availability and research reproducibility in hydrology and water resources” by Stagge, Rosenberg, Abdallah, Akbar, Attallah & James, published in Nature’s Scientific Data] “…reproducibility requires multiple, progressive components such as (i) all data, models, code, directions,…

Read More

GOODMAN: Hold the Bus!

A recent news piece in Nature reported in glowing terms on the “first analysis of ‘pre-registered’ studies”, stating that “[pre-registration] seems to work as intended: to reduce publication bias for positive results.” There are reasons to be somewhat dubious about…

Read More

At the Journal Nature, Peer Reviewers Have the Right To…

[From an editorial published in Nature entitled, “Referees should exercise their rights”] “At Nature, we recognize that our peer reviewers have certain ‘rights’. One of the most well known is the right to anonymity. Less widely known is that referees have the…

Read More

Big New Replication Study in Nature! Read All About It!

[From the abstract of the article “Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015″, published in Nature Human Behaviour by Colin Camerer et al.] “Being able to replicate scientific findings is crucial for scientific progress. We replicate 21 systematically…

Read More

Nature Journal Says It Supports Replications. But Then There’s Revealed Preference.

[From the article, “One team’s struggle to publish a replication attempt, part 3” by Mante Nieuwland, published at Retraction Watch] “The purpose of this post was to provide a transparent, behind-the-scenes account of our replication study and what happened when…

Read More

IN THE NEWS: Nature (January 23, 2018)

[From the article “Robust research needs many lines of evidence” by Marcus Munafò and George Davey Smith, published in Nature]  “…replication alone will get us only so far. In some cases, routine replication might actually make matters worse. Consistent findings could take…

Read More