Literature DB >> 24239011

Incentivising reproducible research.

Katherine S Button1, Marcus R Munafò2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2013        PMID： 24239011      PMCID： PMC4959568          DOI： 10.1016/j.cortex.2013.09.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cortex        ISSN： 0010-9452            Impact factor:   4.027


× No keyword cloud information.
  10 in total

Review 1.  Sifting the evidence-what's wrong with significance tests?

Authors:  J A Sterne; G Davey Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-01-27

2.  The statistical power of abnormal-social psychological research: a review.

Authors:  J COHEN
Journal:  J Abnorm Soc Psychol       Date:  1962-09

3.  Experimental power comes from powerful theories - the real problem in null hypothesis testing.

Authors:  John C Ashton
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 34.870

4.  Confidence and precision increase with high statistical power.

Authors:  Katherine S Button; John P A Ioannidis; Claire Mokrysz; Brian A Nosek; Jonathan Flint; Emma S J Robinson; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 34.870

5.  Misuse of power: in defence of small-scale science.

Authors:  Philip T Quinlan
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 34.870

6.  Small sample size is not the real problem.

Authors:  Peter Bacchetti
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 34.870

Review 7.  Rewarding high-power replication research.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Birte U Forstmann
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 4.027

8.  The way biomedical research is organized has dramatically changed over the past half-century: are the changes for the better?

Authors:  David H Hubel
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2009-10-29       Impact factor: 17.173

9.  Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2012-11

Review 10.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience.

Authors:  Katherine S Button; John P A Ioannidis; Claire Mokrysz; Brian A Nosek; Jonathan Flint; Emma S J Robinson; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 34.870
  10 in total
  1 in total

1.  Rigor and reproducibility in rodent behavioral research.

Authors:  Maria Gulinello; Heather A Mitchell; Qiang Chang; W Timothy O'Brien; Zhaolan Zhou; Ted Abel; Li Wang; Joshua G Corbin; Surabi Veeraragavan; Rodney C Samaco; Nick A Andrews; Michela Fagiolini; Toby B Cole; Thomas M Burbacher; Jacqueline N Crawley
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 2.877
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.