Transparency in ecology and evolution

real problems, real solutions

Timothy H. Parker*, Wolfgang Forstmeier, Julia Koricheva, Fiona Fidler, Jarrod D. Hadfield, Yung En Chee, Clint D. Kelly, Jessica Gurevitch, Shinichi Nakagawa

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

80 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To make progress scientists need to know what other researchers have found and how they found it. However, transparency is often insufficient across much of ecology and evolution. Researchers often fail to report results and methods in detail sufficient to permit interpretation and meta-analysis, and many results go entirely unreported. Further, these unreported results are often a biased subset. Thus the conclusions we can draw from the published literature are themselves often biased and sometimes might be entirely incorrect. Fortunately there is a movement across empirical disciplines, and now within ecology and evolution, to shape editorial policies to better promote transparency. This can be done by either requiring more disclosure by scientists or by developing incentives to encourage disclosure.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)711-719
Number of pages9
JournalTrends in Ecology and Evolution
Volume31
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2016
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • PUBLICATION BIAS
  • P-VALUES
  • BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY
  • STATISTICAL POWER
  • ANIMAL-BEHAVIOR
  • EFFECT SIZE
  • METAANALYSIS
  • BIOLOGISTS
  • DEFENSE
  • QUALITY
  • replication
  • preregistration
  • selective reporting
  • inflated effect size
  • P-hacking
  • confirmation bias

Cite this