Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Brazilian Political Science Review |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212019000200400 |
Resumo: | Despite a widespread agreement on the importance of transparency in science, a growing body of evidence suggests that both the natural and the social sciences are facing a reproducibility crisis. In this paper, we present seven reasons why journals and authors should implement — transparent guidelines. We argue that sharing replication materials, which include full disclosure of the methods used to collect and analyze data, the public availability of raw and manipulated data, in addition to computational scripts, may generate the following positive outcomes: 01. production of trustworthy empirical results, by preventing intentional frauds and avoiding honest mistakes; 02. making the writing and publishing of papers more efficient; 03. enhancing the reviewers’ ability to provide better evaluations; 04. enabling the continuity of academic work; 05. developing scientific reputation; 06. helping to learn data analysis; and 07. increasing the impact of scholarly work. In addition, we review the most recent computational tools to work reproducibly. With this paper, we hope to foster transparency within the political science scholarly community. |
id |
ABCP-1_99d33efc86843793e27178612e07f477 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1981-38212019000200400 |
network_acronym_str |
ABCP-1 |
network_name_str |
Brazilian Political Science Review |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and ReproducibilityTransparencyreproducibilityreplicationDespite a widespread agreement on the importance of transparency in science, a growing body of evidence suggests that both the natural and the social sciences are facing a reproducibility crisis. In this paper, we present seven reasons why journals and authors should implement — transparent guidelines. We argue that sharing replication materials, which include full disclosure of the methods used to collect and analyze data, the public availability of raw and manipulated data, in addition to computational scripts, may generate the following positive outcomes: 01. production of trustworthy empirical results, by preventing intentional frauds and avoiding honest mistakes; 02. making the writing and publishing of papers more efficient; 03. enhancing the reviewers’ ability to provide better evaluations; 04. enabling the continuity of academic work; 05. developing scientific reputation; 06. helping to learn data analysis; and 07. increasing the impact of scholarly work. In addition, we review the most recent computational tools to work reproducibly. With this paper, we hope to foster transparency within the political science scholarly community.Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política2019-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212019000200400Brazilian Political Science Review v.13 n.2 2019reponame:Brazilian Political Science Reviewinstname:Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP)instacron:ABCP10.1590/1981-3821201900020001info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFigueiredo Filho,DalsonLins,RodrigoDomingos,AmandaJanz,NicoleSilva,Lucaseng2019-08-27T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1981-38212019000200400Revistahttps://brazilianpoliticalsciencereview.org/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbpsr@brazilianpoliticalsciencareview.org||bpsr@bpsr.org.br1981-38211981-3821opendoar:2019-08-27T00:00Brazilian Political Science Review - Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility |
title |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility |
spellingShingle |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility Figueiredo Filho,Dalson Transparency reproducibility replication |
title_short |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility |
title_full |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility |
title_fullStr |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility |
title_full_unstemmed |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility |
title_sort |
Seven Reasons Why: A User’s Guide to Transparency and Reproducibility |
author |
Figueiredo Filho,Dalson |
author_facet |
Figueiredo Filho,Dalson Lins,Rodrigo Domingos,Amanda Janz,Nicole Silva,Lucas |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Lins,Rodrigo Domingos,Amanda Janz,Nicole Silva,Lucas |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Figueiredo Filho,Dalson Lins,Rodrigo Domingos,Amanda Janz,Nicole Silva,Lucas |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Transparency reproducibility replication |
topic |
Transparency reproducibility replication |
description |
Despite a widespread agreement on the importance of transparency in science, a growing body of evidence suggests that both the natural and the social sciences are facing a reproducibility crisis. In this paper, we present seven reasons why journals and authors should implement — transparent guidelines. We argue that sharing replication materials, which include full disclosure of the methods used to collect and analyze data, the public availability of raw and manipulated data, in addition to computational scripts, may generate the following positive outcomes: 01. production of trustworthy empirical results, by preventing intentional frauds and avoiding honest mistakes; 02. making the writing and publishing of papers more efficient; 03. enhancing the reviewers’ ability to provide better evaluations; 04. enabling the continuity of academic work; 05. developing scientific reputation; 06. helping to learn data analysis; and 07. increasing the impact of scholarly work. In addition, we review the most recent computational tools to work reproducibly. With this paper, we hope to foster transparency within the political science scholarly community. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212019000200400 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-38212019000200400 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/1981-3821201900020001 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Political Science Review v.13 n.2 2019 reponame:Brazilian Political Science Review instname:Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP) instacron:ABCP |
instname_str |
Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP) |
instacron_str |
ABCP |
institution |
ABCP |
reponame_str |
Brazilian Political Science Review |
collection |
Brazilian Political Science Review |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Political Science Review - Associação Brasileira de Ciência Política (ABCP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
bpsr@brazilianpoliticalsciencareview.org||bpsr@bpsr.org.br |
_version_ |
1754302908242853888 |