SciCombinator

Discover the most talked about and latest scientific content & concepts.

KS Button, L Bal, A Clark and T Shipley
Abstract
The evidence that many of the findings in the published literature may be unreliable is compelling. There is an excess of positive results, often from studies with small sample sizes, or other methodological limitations, and the conspicuous absence of null findings from studies of a similar quality. This distorts the evidence base, leading to false conclusions and undermining scientific progress. Central to this problem is a peer-review system where the decisions of authors, reviewers, and editors are more influenced by impressive results than they are by the validity of the study design. To address this, BMC Psychology is launching a pilot to trial a new ‘results-free’ peer-review process, whereby editors and reviewers are blinded to the study’s results, initially assessing manuscripts on the scientific merits of the rationale and methods alone. The aim is to improve the reliability and quality of published research, by focusing editorial decisions on the rigour of the methods, and preventing impressive ends justifying poor means.
Tweets*
271
Facebook likes*
5
Reddit*
1
News coverage*
0
Blogs*
3
SC clicks
0
Concepts
Reliability, Critical thinking, Publishing, Publication bias, Sample size, Peer review, Academic publishing, Scientific method
MeSH headings
-
comments powered by Disqus

* Data courtesy of Altmetric.com