Evidence of experimental bias in the life sciences: why we need blind data recording

Luke Holman, Megan L. Head, Robert Lanfear, Michael D. Jennions

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

85 Citations (Scopus)
11 Downloads (Pure)


Observer bias and other "experimenter effects" occur when researchers' expectations influence study outcome. These biases are strongest when researchers expect a particular result, are measuring subjective variables, and have an incentive to produce data that confirm predictions. To minimize bias, it is good practice to work "blind," meaning that experimenters are unaware of the identity or treatment group of their subjects while conducting research. Here, using text mining and a literature review, we find evidence that blind protocols are uncommon in the life sciences and that nonblind studies tend to report higher effect sizes and more significant p-values. We discuss methods to minimize bias and urge researchers, editors, and peer reviewers to keep blind protocols in mind.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere1002190
Pages (from-to)1-12
Number of pages12
JournalPLoS Biology
Issue number7
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Bibliographical note

Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Evidence of experimental bias in the life sciences: why we need blind data recording'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this