Using
a
database
of
open
data
policies
for
199
journals
in
ecology
and
evolution,
we
found
no
detectable
link
between
sharing
requirements
article
retractions
or
corrections.
Despite
the
potential
to
facilitate
error
detection,
poorly
archived
datasets,
absence
code,
stigma
associated
with
correcting
retracting
articles
likely
stymie
correction.
Requiring
code
alongside
destigmatizing
correction
among
authors
journal
editors
could
increase
effectiveness
at
helping
science
self-correct.
Ethology,
Год журнала:
2022,
Номер
128(9), С. 647 - 651
Опубликована: Авг. 2, 2022
Abstract
In
recent
years,
we
witnessed
an
increasing
number
of
funding
agencies,
scientific
journals
and
scientists
agreeing
that
society
science
benefit
from
open
access
to
research
data.
Benefits
derive
mainly
increased
knowledge
for
all
improved
transparency
credibility
in
academia.
However,
despite
the
advances
data,
three
significant
aspects
still
need
considerable
policing:
data
quality,
accompanying
summaries
with
basic
information
files
(i.e.
metadata)
computational
codes
used
generate
outcomes.
Only
by
having
these
components
together,
can
achieve
efficient
sharing
reuse,
hence
higher
transparency.
Here,
present
two
complementary
approaches
potentially
help
shared
quality:
(i)
file(s)
should
be
guided
step‐by‐step
public
archives
mandatory
metadata,
(ii)
creating
assistant
editor
positions
at
editorial
boards
a
leading
role
quality
reproducibility.
Forty‐four
editors‐in‐chief
field
behaviour,
ecology
evolution
their
opinion
us
regarding
approaches.
Although
most
views
were
divided,
majority
estimated
current
board
members
do
not
have
necessary
skills
assess
Since
are
core
studies,
consider
only
presence
but
also
as
requirement
publication.
Work
carried
out
since
the
late
70s
has
provided
key
insights
into
comparative
biomechanics,
kinematics,
behaviour,
and
neurobiology
of
fish
escape
responses.
With
environmental
change
expected
to
affect
physiology
biomechanics
aquatic
ectotherms,
there
is
a
growing
interest
in
understanding
how
stressors
impact
swimming
performance
behaviour
fishes
during
responses,
particularly
context
predator-prey
interactions.
As
study
continues
expand,
have
been
repeated
calls
standardise
experiments
reporting
practices
facilitate
integrative
studies.
Here,
we
provide
set
practical
guidelines
for
conducting,
analysing,
on
responses
fish,
including
checklist
assist
authors
undertaking
these
experiments.
These
resources
will
executing
response
rigorous
transparent
fashion,
helping
advance
an
era
rapid
change.
Journal of Experimental Biology,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
227(9)
Опубликована: Апрель 30, 2024
ABSTRACT
The
ease
with
which
scientific
data,
particularly
certain
types
of
raw
data
in
experimental
biology,
can
be
fabricated
without
trace
begs
urgent
attention.
This
is
thought
to
a
widespread
problem
across
the
academic
world,
where
published
results
are
major
currency,
incentivizing
publication
(usually
positive)
at
cost
lax
rigor
and
even
fraudulent
data.
Although
solutions
improve
sharing
methodological
transparency
increasingly
being
implemented,
inability
detect
dishonesty
within
remains
an
inherent
flaw
way
we
judge
research.
We
therefore
propose
that
one
solution
would
development
non-modifiable
format
could
alongside
results;
enable
authentication
from
earliest
stages
collection.
A
further
extension
this
tool
allow
changes
initial
original
version
tracked,
so
every
reviewer
reader
follow
logical
footsteps
author
unintentional
errors
or
intentional
manipulations
Were
such
developed,
not
advocate
its
use
as
prerequisite
for
journal
submission;
rather,
envisage
authors
given
option
provide
authentication.
Only
who
did
manipulate
fabricate
their
risking
discovery,
mere
choice
do
already
increases
credibility
(much
like
‘honest
signaling’
animals).
strongly
believe
enhance
honesty
encourage
more
reliable
science.
Using
a
database
of
open
data
policies
for
199
journals
in
ecology
and
evolution,
we
found
no
detectable
link
between
sharing
requirements
article
retractions
or
corrections.
Despite
the
potential
to
facilitate
error
detection,
poorly
archived
datasets,
absence
code,
stigma
associated
with
correcting
retracting
articles
likely
stymie
correction.
Requiring
code
alongside
destigmatizing
correction
among
authors
journal
editors
could
increase
effectiveness
at
helping
science
self-correct.