Open access to both the scientific process and results should be the default, not the exception. In the first of this two-part episode, Brian Nosek and Tim Errington from the Center for Open Science talk about the important role of open science in accelerating scientific progress, as discussed in their article “Reproducibility in Cancer Biology: Making sense of replications.” In part two of this episode, they share stories from a cancer replication conducted as part of the Center’s attempt to reproduce impactful published research.
- The Center for Open Science
- The Open Science Framework
- The Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology
- Many analysts, one dataset: Making transparent how variations in analytical choices affect results (paper regarding red carding in soccer)
- Investigating Variation in Replicability: A “Many Labs” Replication Project
- Reproducibility Project partner — Science Exchange
- Undark‘s Go Forth and Replicate: On Creating Incentives for Repeat Studies
- The Atlantic‘s How Reliable Are Psychology Studies?
- Reason magazine’s Broken Science
- Science magazine’s Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
- APS‘s Reproducibility Project Named Among Top Scientific Achievements of 2015
- What does research reproducibility mean? (by Steven N. Goodman, Daniele Fanelli and John P. A. Ioannidis)
Patrons of Parsing Science gain exclusive access to bonus clips from all our episodes and can also download mp3s of every individual episode.
Support us for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Cancel anytime.
Patrons can access bonus content here.
Hosts / Producers
Ryan Watkins & Doug Leigh
How to Cite
Watkins, R., Leigh, D., Nosek, B., & Errington, T.. (2017, October 17). Parsing Science – Open Science and Replications (Part 1 of 2). figshare. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5907961.v2
What’s The Angle? by Shane Ivers