9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Seven steps toward more transparency in statistical practice

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship

          There is an urgent need to improve the infrastructure supporting the reuse of scholarly data. A diverse set of stakeholders—representing academia, industry, funding agencies, and scholarly publishers—have come together to design and jointly endorse a concise and measureable set of principles that we refer to as the FAIR Data Principles. The intent is that these may act as a guideline for those wishing to enhance the reusability of their data holdings. Distinct from peer initiatives that focus on the human scholar, the FAIR Principles put specific emphasis on enhancing the ability of machines to automatically find and use the data, in addition to supporting its reuse by individuals. This Comment is the first formal publication of the FAIR Principles, and includes the rationale behind them, and some exemplar implementations in the community.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The ASA's Statement onp-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant.

              In this article, we accomplish two things. First, we show that despite empirical psychologists' nominal endorsement of a low rate of false-positive findings (≤ .05), flexibility in data collection, analysis, and reporting dramatically increases actual false-positive rates. In many cases, a researcher is more likely to falsely find evidence that an effect exists than to correctly find evidence that it does not. We present computer simulations and a pair of actual experiments that demonstrate how unacceptably easy it is to accumulate (and report) statistically significant evidence for a false hypothesis. Second, we suggest a simple, low-cost, and straightforwardly effective disclosure-based solution to this problem. The solution involves six concrete requirements for authors and four guidelines for reviewers, all of which impose a minimal burden on the publication process.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Nature Human Behaviour
                Nat Hum Behav
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                2397-3374
                November 2021
                November 11 2021
                November 2021
                : 5
                : 11
                : 1473-1480
                Article
                10.1038/s41562-021-01211-8
                34764461
                a37519f0-d08d-4671-ae9b-94efdf77a25e
                © 2021

                Free to read

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article