Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Newsflash! Just out – very good and comprehensive paper on this topic:
Forstmeier, W., Wagenmakers, E.-J., & Parker, T. H....
Dickersin K, and Min YI. 1993. NIH clinical trials and publication bias. The Online journal of
current clinical trials Doc...
Munafo, M., Noble, S., Browne, W. J., Brunner, D., Button, K., Ferreira, J., . . . Blumenstein, R.
(2014). Scientific rigo...
John P. A. Ioannidis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGLF6olIZYY
1st BHA Annual Special Lecture
Lakens, D. Improving your ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Bishop reproducibility references nov2016

921 views

Published on

References for talk at Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, 22nd Nov 2017

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Bishop reproducibility references nov2016

  1. 1. Newsflash! Just out – very good and comprehensive paper on this topic: Forstmeier, W., Wagenmakers, E.-J., & Parker, T. H. (2016). Detecting and avoiding likely false-positive findings – a practical guide. Biological Reviews, n/a- n/a. doi: 10.1111/brv.12315 What is the reproducibility crisis in science and what can we do about it? D.V. M. Bishop Talk at Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, 22nd November 2016 References Academy of Medical Sciences. 2015. Symposium report: Reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research: improving research practice. http://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/policy/policy- projects/reproducibility-and-reliability-of-biomedical-research/ Bem, DJ. 2014. Writing the Empirical Journal Article. In John M. Darley, Mark P. Zanna, and Henry L. Roediger III (Eds) The Compleat Academic: A Practical Guide for the Beginning Social Scientist, 2nd Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2004. Bishop DVM. 2016. Open research practices: unintended consequences and suggestions for averting them. (Commentary on the Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative). Open Science 3. http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/3/4/160109 Bustin SA. 2014. The reproducibility of biomedical research: Sleepers awake! Biomolecular Detection and Quantification 2:35-42. Button KS, Ioannidis JPA, Mokrysz C, Nosek BA, Flint J, Robinson ESJ, and Munafo MR. 2013. Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14:365-376. Chabris C, and Simons D. 2010. The invisible gorilla and other ways our intuition deceives us. London: HarperCollins. Chambers, C. (2017, forthcoming) The seven deadly sins of psychology. Princeton University Press. Collins, F. S., & Tabak, L. A. (2014). NIH plans to enhance reproducibility. Nature, 505(7485), 612-613. Cramer AOJ, van Ravenzwaaij D, Matzke D, Steingroever H, Wetzels R, Grasman RPPP, Waldorp LJ, and Wagenmakers E-J. 2016. Hidden multiplicity in exploratory multiway ANOVA: Prevalence and remedies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 23:640-647. De Groot AD. 2014. The meaning of “significance” for different types of research [translated from original 1956 paper and annotated by Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, Denny Borsboom, Josine Verhagen, Rogier Kievit, Marjan Bakker, Angelique Cramer, Dora Matzke, Don Mellenbergh, and Han L. J. van der Maas]. Acta Psychologica 148:188-194.
  2. 2. Dickersin K, and Min YI. 1993. NIH clinical trials and publication bias. The Online journal of current clinical trials Doc No 50.http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/8306005 Dubois J, and Adolphs R. 2016 Building a Science of Individual Differences from fMRI. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.03.014 Fanelli, D. (2010). "Positive" results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLOS One, 5(3). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010068 Gelman A, and Loken E. 2013. The garden of forking paths: Why multiple comparisons can be a problem, even when there is no 'fishing expedition' or 'p-hacking' and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time. www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/p_hacking.pdf Greenwald AG. 1975. Consequences of prejudice against the null. Psychological Bulletin 82:1- 20. Ioannidis JPA. 2005. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine 2:e124. John LK, Loewenstein G, Prelec D (2012) Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychol Sci 23: 524–532. doi: 10.1177/0956797611430953 Kerr, N. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 196-217. Kraft, P., Zeggini, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2009). Replication in Genome-Wide Association Studies. Statistical Science, 24(4), 561-573. doi: 10.1214/09-sts290 Lazic,S. E. 2016. Experimental Design for Laboratory Biologists : Maximising Information and Improving Reproducibility Levenson T. 2015. The Hunt for Vulcan: . . . And How Albert Einstein Destroyed a Planet, Discovered Relativity, and Deciphered the Universe. New York: Random House. (for summary see: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/11/151104-newton-einstein-gravity-vulcan- planets-mercury-astronomy-theory-of-relativity-ngbooktalk/) Macleod MR, McLean AL, Kyriakopoulou A, Serghiou S, de Wilde A, Sherratt N, Hirst T, Hemblade R, Bahor Z, Nunes-Fonseca C et al. 2015. Risk of Bias in Reports of In Vivo Research: A Focus for Improvement. PLOS Biology 13. MacLeod RAF, Dirks WG, Matsuo Y, Kaufmann M, Milch H, and Drexler HG. 1999. Widespread intraspecies cross-contamination of human tumor cell lines arising at source. International Journal of Cancer 83:555-563. MacCoun R., Perlmutter S. 2015 Hide results to seek the truth. Nature 526, 187-189 Masters JR. 2012. Cell-line authentication: End the scandal of false cell lines. Nature 492:186- 186. McNutt, M. (2014). The measure of research merit. Science, 346(6214), 1155-1155. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa3796
  3. 3. Munafo, M., Noble, S., Browne, W. J., Brunner, D., Button, K., Ferreira, J., . . . Blumenstein, R. (2014). Scientific rigor and the art of motorcycle maintenance. Nat Biotech, 32(9), 871-873. doi: 10.1038/nbt.3004 Nardone RM, MacLeod RAF, and Capes-Davis A. 2016. Cancer: Authenticate new xenograft models. Nature 532:313-313. Newcombe, R. G. (1987). Towards a reduction in publication bias. British Medical Journal, 295, 656-659 Rosenthal R. 1979. The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin 86:638-641. Ryan J. 2008. Understanding and managing cell culture contamination: Technical bulletin. www.level.com.tw/html/ezcatfiles/vipweb20/img/img/20297/contamination-COR.pdf Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314(7079), 497. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497 Zilles K, and Amunts K. 2010. Centenary of Brodmann's map - conception and fate. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 11:139-145. Other sources Blog on cell line contamination: http://retractionwatch.com/2015/12/08/hela-is-the-tip-of-the-contamination-iceberg-guest- post-from-cell-culture-scientist/ My blog: http://deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/bishopblog-catalogue-updated-24th- nov.html See sections on Statistics and Academic Life Pre-registration: Rationale and how-to-do it, with FAQs: https://osf.io/8mpji/wiki/home/ MMR/autism debacle: http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp Account of Archie Cochrane: from Ben Goldacre’s blog: http://www.badscience.net/2010/04/righteous-mischief-from-archie-cochrane/ Chris Chambers on Guardian blog: https://www.theguardian.com/science/head- quarters/2014/may/20/psychology-registration-revolution Recent piece on Merck’s threat: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601348/merck-wants- its-money-back-if-university-research-is-wrong/ David Colquhoun on journal impact factor: http://www.dcscience.net/colquhoun-nature- impact-2003.pdf
  4. 4. John P. A. Ioannidis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGLF6olIZYY 1st BHA Annual Special Lecture Lakens, D. Improving your statistical inferences: https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical- inferences

×