Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists

Abstract

Science is meant to be the systematic and objective study of the world but evidence suggests that scientific practices are sometimes falling short of this expectation. In this invited idea, we argue that any failure to conduct research according to a documented plan (lack of reliability) and/or any failure to ensure that reconducting the same project would provide the same finding (lack of reproducibility), will result in a low probability of independent studies reaching the same outcome (lack of replicability). After outlining the challenges facing behavioral ecology and science more broadly and incorporating advice from international organizations such as the Center for Open Science (COS), we present clear guidelines and tutorials on what we think open practices represent for behavioral ecologists. In addition, we indicate some of the currently most appropriate and freely available tools for adopting these practices. Finally, we suggest that all journals in our field, such as Behavioral Ecology, give additional weight to transparent studies and therefore provide greater incentives to align our scientific practices to our scientific values. Overall, we argue that producing demonstrably credible science is now fully achievable for the benefit of each researcher individually and for our community as a whole.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 72 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.