Literature DB >> 26168425

Bite-Size Science and Its Undesired Side Effects.

Marco Bertamini1, Marcus R Munafò2.   

Abstract

Short and rapid publication of research findings has many advantages. However, there is another side of the coin that needs careful consideration. We argue that the most dangerous aspect of a shift toward "bite-size" publishing is the relationship between study size and publication bias. Findings based on a single study or a study based on a limited sample size are more likely to be false positive, because the false positive rate remains constant, whereas the true positive rate (the power) declines as sample size declines. Pressure on productivity and on novelty value further exacerbates the problem. © Association for Psychological Science 2012.

Keywords:  allied field; behavioral; cognition; perception; publishing

Year:  2012        PMID: 26168425     DOI: 10.1177/1745691611429353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci        ISSN: 1745-6916


  12 in total

1.  Thinking About Data, Research Methods, and Statistical Analyses: Commentary on Sijtsma's (2014) "Playing with Data".

Authors:  Irwin D Waldman; Scott O Lilienfeld
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.500

2.  Nothing but the truth. Are the media as bad at communicating science as scientists fear?

Authors:  Paige Brown
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 8.807

3.  Citation of previous meta-analyses on the same topic: a clue to perpetuation of incorrect methods?

Authors:  Tianjing Li; Kay Dickersin
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2013-03-22       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  Perception isn't so simple: commentary on Bernard, Gervais, Allen, Campomizzi, and Klein (2012).

Authors:  Michael J Tarr
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-04-18

Review 5.  Statistical and Methodological Considerations for the Interpretation of Intranasal Oxytocin Studies.

Authors:  Hasse Walum; Irwin D Waldman; Larry J Young
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 13.382

6.  Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank.

Authors:  Björn Brembs; Katherine Button; Marcus Munafò
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Recent meta-analyses neglect previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses about the same topic: a systematic examination.

Authors:  Bartosz Helfer; Aaron Prosser; Myrto T Samara; John R Geddes; Andrea Cipriani; John M Davis; Dimitris Mavridis; Georgia Salanti; Stefan Leucht
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 8.775

8.  On the persistence of low power in psychological science.

Authors:  Ivan Vankov; Jeffrey Bowers; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2014-03-03       Impact factor: 2.143

9.  Why selective publication of statistically significant results can be effective.

Authors:  Joost de Winter; Riender Happee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Priming intelligent behavior: an elusive phenomenon.

Authors:  David R Shanks; Ben R Newell; Eun Hee Lee; Divya Balakrishnan; Lisa Ekelund; Zarus Cenac; Fragkiski Kavvadia; Christopher Moore
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.