Literature DB >> 29531095

Scientific progress despite irreproducibility: A seeming paradox.

Richard M Shiffrin1, Katy Börner2, Stephen M Stigler3.   

Abstract

It appears paradoxical that science is producing outstanding new results and theories at a rapid rate at the same time that researchers are identifying serious problems in the practice of science that cause many reports to be irreproducible and invalid. Certainly, the practice of science needs to be improved, and scientists are now pursuing this goal. However, in this perspective, we argue that this seeming paradox is not new, has always been part of the way science works, and likely will remain so. We first introduce the paradox. We then review a wide range of challenges that appear to make scientific success difficult. Next, we describe the factors that make science work-in the past, present, and presumably also in the future. We then suggest that remedies for the present practice of science need to be applied selectively so as not to slow progress and illustrate with a few examples. We conclude with arguments that communication of science needs to emphasize not just problems but the enormous successes and benefits that science has brought and is now bringing to all elements of modern society.

Keywords:  reproducibility; science communication; science history; scientific progress; scientometrics

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29531095      PMCID: PMC5856513          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1711786114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  8 in total

1.  The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge.

Authors:  Stefan Wuchty; Benjamin F Jones; Brian Uzzi
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-04-12       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  On the Interpretation of the Markings on Mars.

Authors:  H M Stanley
Journal:  Science       Date:  1892-10-21       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Why the US science and engineering workforce is aging rapidly.

Authors:  David M Blau; Bruce A Weinberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Crisis or self-correction: Rethinking media narratives about the well-being of science.

Authors:  Kathleen Hall Jamieson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Reproducibility of research: Issues and proposed remedies.

Authors:  David B Allison; Richard M Shiffrin; Victoria Stodden
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Katy Börner: Atlas of science: visualizing what we know: The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA/London, UK, 2010, US$20.

Authors:  Loet Leydesdorff
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 3.238

7.  The preregistration revolution.

Authors:  Brian A Nosek; Charles R Ebersole; Alexander C DeHaven; David T Mellor
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 12.779

8.  The Changing Landscape of Neuroscience Research, 2006-2015: A Bibliometric Study.

Authors:  Andy Wai Kan Yeung; Tazuko K Goto; W Keung Leung
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 4.677

  8 in total
  7 in total

1.  Should social scientists be distanced from or engaged with the people they study?

Authors:  Kalonji Nzinga; David N Rapp; Christopher Leatherwood; Matthew Easterday; Leoandra Onnie Rogers; Natalie Gallagher; Douglas L Medin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Reproducibility of research: Issues and proposed remedies.

Authors:  David B Allison; Richard M Shiffrin; Victoria Stodden
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  The case for formal methodology in scientific reform.

Authors:  Berna Devezer; Danielle J Navarro; Joachim Vandekerckhove; Erkan Ozge Buzbas
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 2.963

4.  Scientific discovery in a model-centric framework: Reproducibility, innovation, and epistemic diversity.

Authors:  Berna Devezer; Luis G Nardin; Bert Baumgaertner; Erkan Ozge Buzbas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Assessing data availability and research reproducibility in hydrology and water resources.

Authors:  James H Stagge; David E Rosenberg; Adel M Abdallah; Hadia Akbar; Nour A Attallah; Ryan James
Journal:  Sci Data       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 6.444

6.  Understanding experiments and research practices for reproducibility: an exploratory study.

Authors:  Sheeba Samuel; Birgitta König-Ries
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 2.984

7.  Extraordinary claims, extraordinary evidence? A discussion.

Authors:  Richard M Shiffrin; Dora Matzke; Jonathon D Crystal; E-J Wagenmakers; Suyog H Chandramouli; Joachim Vandekerckhove; Marco Zorzi; Richard D Morey; Mary C Murphy
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2021-08-10       Impact factor: 1.986

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.