4.5 Article

Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists

Journal

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 2, Pages 348-354

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arx003

Keywords

Acknowledging Open Practices; badges; integrity; open science initiative; software; toolkit; TOP guidelines

Funding

  1. Natural Environment Research Council [MO 005941]
  2. Volkswagen Foundation
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
  4. Software Sustainability Institute
  5. Mozilla Science Lab
  6. EPSRC [EP/N018958/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. ESRC [ES/K009230/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  8. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/N018958/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Science is meant to be the systematic and objective study of the world but evidence suggests that scientific practices are sometimes falling short of this expectation. In this invited idea, we argue that any failure to conduct research according to a documented plan (lack of reliability) and/or any failure to ensure that reconducting the same project would provide the same finding (lack of reproducibility), will result in a low probability of independent studies reaching the same outcome (lack of replicability). After outlining the challenges facing behavioral ecology and science more broadly and incorporating advice from international organizations such as the Center for Open Science (COS), we present clear guidelines and tutorials on what we think open practices represent for behavioral ecologists. In addition, we indicate some of the currently most appropriate and freely available tools for adopting these practices. Finally, we suggest that all journals in our field, such as Behavioral Ecology, give additional weight to transparent studies and therefore provide greater incentives to align our scientific practices to our scientific values. Overall, we argue that producing demonstrably credible science is now fully achievable for the benefit of each researcher individually and for our community as a whole.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available