Fewer numbers, better science: ‘qualification’ in science evaluation
In this commentary in Nature, Rinze Benedictus and Frank Miedema of the University Medical Center Utrecht and Mark …
With any new development, unintended consequences arise. This is not different for initiatives that aim to improve reproducibility, such as transparency. This commentary describes ways to distinguish scrutiny from harassment. The authors present ten red flags and five double-edged tools of scholarly exchange.
Title: Don’t let transparency damage science
Authors: Lewandowsky S, Bishop D
NRIN devotes a great deal of attention to the website’s content and would greatly appreciate your suggestions of documents or links you believe to belong on this website.
This selection is an incomplete convenience sample, and does not reflect NRIN’s vision or opinion. Including an item does not necessarily mean that we agree with the authors nor does it imply we think unmentioned items are of poorer quality.
Please report any suggestions, inaccuracies or nonfunctioning hyperlinks etc. that you discover. Thanks in advance!Contact