scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Knowledge and Attitudes Among Life Scientists Toward Reproducibility Within Journal Articles: A Research Survey.

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
In this paper, the authors and scientists view the issues around reproducibility, focusing on interactive elements such as interactive figures embedded within online publications, as a solution for enabling the reproducible of experiments.
Abstract
We constructed a survey to understand how authors and scientists view the issues around reproducibility, focusing on interactive elements such as interactive figures embedded within online publications, as a solution for enabling the reproducibility of experiments. We report the views of 251 researchers, comprising authors who have published in eLIFE Sciences, and those who work at the Norwich Biosciences Institutes (NBI). The survey also outlines to what extent researchers are occupied with reproducing experiments themselves. Currently, there is an increasing range of tools that attempt to address the production of reproducible research by making code, data, and analyses available to the community for reuse. We wanted to collect information about attitudes around the consumer end of the spectrum, where life scientists interact with research outputs to interpret scientific results. Static plots and figures within articles are a central part of this interpretation, and therefore we asked respondents to consider various features for an interactive figure within a research article that would allow them to better understand and reproduce a published analysis. The majority (91%) of respondents reported that when authors describe their research methodology (methods and analyses) in detail, published research can become more reproducible. The respondents believe that having interactive figures in published papers is a beneficial element to themselves, the papers they read as well as to their readers. Whilst interactive figures are one potential solution for consuming the results of research more effectively to enable reproducibility, we also review the equally pressing technical and cultural demands on researchers that need to be addressed to achieve greater success in reproducibility in the life sciences.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

A survey of researchers’ code sharing and code reuse practices, and assessment of interactive notebook prototypes

Lauren Cadwallader, +1 more
- 22 Aug 2022 - 
TL;DR: The average researcher, according to the results, is unwilling to incur additional costs that are currently needed to use code sharing tools alongside a publication, infer this means different models for funding and producing interactive or executable research outputs if they are to reach a large number of researchers.
Book ChapterDOI

The Reproducibility Crisis and Autism Spectrum Research

TL;DR: In the field of autism spectrum research, it has been discovered that some results published in studies may not be correct because different researchers using the same dataset and analytical methods were unable to create the same results as discussed by the authors .
Journal ArticleDOI

TIER2: enhancing Trust, Integrity and Efficiency in Research through next-level Reproducibility

TL;DR: The TIER2 project as mentioned in this paper is a new international project funded by the European Commission under their Horizon Europe programme, covering three broad research areas (social, life and computer sciences) and two stakeholder groups (research publishers and funders) to systematically investigate reproducibility across contexts.
References
More filters
Proceedings ArticleDOI

Gamification in Science: A Study of Requirements in the Context of Reproducible Research

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore possible uses of gamification to support reproducible practices in high energy physics in high-energy physics, and discuss design implications for gamification in science.
Journal ArticleDOI

Reproducibility blues

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that research findings advance science only if they are significant, reliable and reproducible, and that researchers and journals must publish robust data in a way that renders it optimally reproducible.
Journal ArticleDOI

A Link is not Enough – Reproducibility of Data

TL;DR: It is argued that providing access to the raw, original datasets is not enough and the details of the data preparation process matter and subtle differences during data conversion can have a large impact on the outcome of runtime results.
Journal ArticleDOI

Verify original results through reanalysis before replicating.

TL;DR: This work states that original results that appear erroneous and that cannot be reproduced by reanalysis offer little evidence to begin with, thereby diminishing the need to replicate.
Journal ArticleDOI

Insertables: I've got it under my skin

TL;DR: Insertable RFID and NFC chips are very small and made of bio-inert materials and can be used in smart phones, tablets, and wearable devices.
Related Papers (5)