Blame Bad Incentives for Bad Science
Scientists have to publish a constant stream of new results to succeed. But in the process, their success may lead to science’s failure, two new studies warn.
Send us a link
Who Cares about the Connection?
How easy is it really to exactly replicate a scientific experiment by just reading the published result?
Why is so much research dodgy? Blame the Research Excellence Framework
The Ref star system encourages novelty but offers no incentive to replicate studies – and that’s exactly what scientists need to do to be more sure of our claims.
BioBlocks: Programming Protocols in Biology Made Easier
BioBlocks is an open-source web-based visual development environment for describing and execute experimental protocols on local robotic platforms or remotely i.e. in the cloud. It aims to serve as a 'de facto' open standard for programming protocols in Biology.
One reason so many scientific studies may be wrong
P hacking is manipulating data and research methods to achieve statistical signifiance. And it could be why so many research papers are false.
A story of struggles to do reproducible computational fluid dynamics
A story of struggles to do reproducible computational fluid dynamics
Failing to record the version of any piece of software or hardware, overlooking a single parameter, or glossing over a restriction on how to use another researcher's code can lead you astray.
From the sugar scam to Brexit, our faith in experts is fading
Science's quality control processes are under question. Scientists should think about changing the rules and extending their peer communities.
Replication Studies
Replication Studies
Researchers with a PhD who are employed by a Dutch research institution can request funding for the replication of 'cornerstone research'.
Cut-throat academia leads to 'natural selection of bad science'
Scientists incentivised to publish surprising results frequently in major journals, despite risk that such findings are likely to be wrong, suggests research.
The Solution to Science's Replication Crisis
The solution to science's replication crisis is a new ecosystem in which scientists sell what they learn from their research.
New Proposals to Solve the Ongoing Reproducibility Crisis
Recap of contest launched by the Winnower and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation to answer the question – How do we ensure that research is reproducible?
The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
John P.A. Ioannidis argues that the production of systematic reviews and meta-analyses has reached epidemic proportions.
There’s a lot of junk fMRI research out there
It's easy to misrepresent the findings from brain scan studies. Just ask a dead salmon.
Challenge of our generation
Reproducible, transparent and reliable science.
The value of the open science movement
Research creates its own problems. Articles may be withdrawn because of irregularities, results can be impossible to reproduce, methods are often non-standardised, and publications may not be accessible. The search is now on for solutions.
A Simple Explanation for the Replication Crisis in Science
The replication crisis in science is largely attributable to a mismatch in our expectations of how often findings should replicate and how difficult it is to actually discover true findings in certain fields.
Go forth and replicate!
To make replication studies more useful, researchers must make more of them, funders must encourage them and journals must publish them.
Replications, ridicule and a recluse
As failures to replicate results using the CRISPR alternative stack up, a quiet scientist stands by his claims.
Gene name errors are widespread in the scientific literature
Approximately one-fifth of papers with supplementary Excel gene lists contain erroneous gene name conversions.
Ten Simple Rules for Taking Advantage of Git and GitHub
All software used for the analysis should be either carefully documented or, better yet, openly shared and directly accessible to others.
Saving Science
Science isn’t self-correcting, it’s self-destructing. To save the enterprise, scientists must come out of the lab and into the real world.
Bad Science Evolves. Stopping It Means Changing Institutional Selection Pressures
Bad Science Evolves. Stopping It Means Changing Institutional Selection Pressures
On The Natural Selection of Bad Science.
Mouse microbes may make scientific studies harder to replicate
The zoo of bacteria and viruses within each lab animal may be confounding experiments.
A Joke Syllabus With a Serious Point: Cussing Away the Reproducibility Crisis
Sanjay Srivastava’s assessment of the state of psychology mixes a certain four-letter word and gallows humor with a desire to raise awareness of important research issues in his field.
How to improve reproducibility: contest winners
Not just a competition but a resource that will continue to be useful now and in the future as we tackle improving reproducibility in the sciences.
The Replication Crisis
Stephanie Wykstra Ivan Oransky Stuart Buck Brian Nosek Julia Galef (Moderator) How can we produce research findings that are both useful and robust?
The Replication Game: How Well Do Psychology Studies Hold Up?
Researchers have created a new system to test influential papers for reproducibility.
×