Öz
Publishing, sharing, and disseminating their research results are among scientists’ most important objectives. This process, which consists of stages full of intensive labor and care, is very laborious and may not always result in a positive outcome. A review of the scientific literature indicates that some non-academic authors publish more than academics. On the other hand, the presence of a widespread reproducibility problem even in highly cited publications negatively affects the reliability of scientific findings. Open-science policies and public peer review practices are needed to overcome these problems.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Reproducibility Replication crisis Open-science Meta-science
Kaynakça
- Allen, C., Mehler, D.M.A (2019). Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond. PLoS Biology, 17, e3000246.
- Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2023). Prolific non-research authors in high impact scientific journals: meta-research study. Scientometrics, 128, 3171-3184.
- Ioannidis, J.P.A., Fanelli, D., Dunne, D.D., Goodman, S.N. (2015). Meta-research: evaluation and improvement of research methods and practices. PLOS Biology, 13, e1002264.
- Mathur, M.B., Fox, M.P. (2023). Toward open and reproducible epidemiology. American Journal of Epidemiology, 192, 658–664.
- Munafò, M.R., Nosek, B.A., Bishop, D., Button, K.S., Chambers, C.D., du Sert, N.P., Simonsohn, U., Wagenmakers, E-J., Ware, J., Ionnidis J. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behav. 1, 0021.
- Pashler, H., Wagenmakers, E. (2012). Editors’ introduction to the special section on replicability in psychological science: A crisis of confidence? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 528-530.
- Walsh, E., Rooney, M., Appleby, L., Wilkinson G. (2000). Open peer review: a randomised trial. Brit. J. Psychiat, 176, 47–51.
Öz
Kaynakça
- Allen, C., Mehler, D.M.A (2019). Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond. PLoS Biology, 17, e3000246.
- Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2023). Prolific non-research authors in high impact scientific journals: meta-research study. Scientometrics, 128, 3171-3184.
- Ioannidis, J.P.A., Fanelli, D., Dunne, D.D., Goodman, S.N. (2015). Meta-research: evaluation and improvement of research methods and practices. PLOS Biology, 13, e1002264.
- Mathur, M.B., Fox, M.P. (2023). Toward open and reproducible epidemiology. American Journal of Epidemiology, 192, 658–664.
- Munafò, M.R., Nosek, B.A., Bishop, D., Button, K.S., Chambers, C.D., du Sert, N.P., Simonsohn, U., Wagenmakers, E-J., Ware, J., Ionnidis J. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behav. 1, 0021.
- Pashler, H., Wagenmakers, E. (2012). Editors’ introduction to the special section on replicability in psychological science: A crisis of confidence? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 528-530.
- Walsh, E., Rooney, M., Appleby, L., Wilkinson G. (2000). Open peer review: a randomised trial. Brit. J. Psychiat, 176, 47–51.
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | İngilizce |
|---|---|
| Konular | Sağlık Politikası |
| Bölüm | Editorial Articles |
| Yazarlar | |
| Erken Görünüm Tarihi | 1 Aralık 2023 |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 26 Aralık 2023 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2023 Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2 |
Contents of the Journal of Health Systems and Policies (JHESP) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.