Literature DB >> 33420300

Biases in ecological research: attitudes of scientists and ways of control.

Elena L Zvereva1, Mikhail V Kozlov2.   

Abstract

The properties of the human mind affect the quality of scientific knowledge through the insertion of unconscious biases during the research process. These biases frequently cause overestimation of the effects under study, thereby violating the reproducibility of the research and potentially leading to incorrect conclusions in subsequent research syntheses. We explored the level of knowledge about biases and attitudes to this problem by analysing 308 responses of ecology scientists to a specifically developed survey. We show that knowledge about biases and attitude towards biases depend on the scientist's career stage, gender and affiliation country. Early career scientists are more concerned about biases, know more about measures to avoid biases, and twice more frequently have learned about biases from their university courses when compared with senior scientists. The respondents believe that their own studies are less prone to biases than are studies by other scientists, which hampers the control of biases in one's own research. We conclude that education about biases is necessary, but not yet sufficient, to avoid biases because the unconscious origin of biases necessitates external intervention to combat them. Obligatory reporting of measures taken against biases in all relevant manuscripts will likely enhance the reproducibility of scientific results.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33420300      PMCID: PMC7794457          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80677-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  16 in total

1.  Age and gender differences in self-esteem-A cross-cultural window.

Authors:  Wiebke Bleidorn; Ruben C Arslan; Jaap J A Denissen; Peter J Rentfrow; Jochen E Gebauer; Jeff Potter; Samuel D Gosling
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2015-12-21

Review 2.  Bias in clinical intervention research.

Authors:  Lise Lotte Gluud
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-01-27       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 3.  Empowering peer reviewers with a checklist to improve transparency.

Authors:  Timothy H Parker; Simon C Griffith; Judith L Bronstein; Fiona Fidler; Susan Foster; Hannah Fraser; Wolfgang Forstmeier; Jessica Gurevitch; Julia Koricheva; Ralf Seppelt; Morgan W Tingley; Shinichi Nakagawa
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 15.460

4.  Transparency in Ecology and Evolution: Real Problems, Real Solutions.

Authors:  Timothy H Parker; Wolfgang Forstmeier; Julia Koricheva; Fiona Fidler; Jarrod D Hadfield; Yung En Chee; Clint D Kelly; Jessica Gurevitch; Shinichi Nakagawa
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 17.712

5.  1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility.

Authors:  Monya Baker
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  "Positive" results increase down the Hierarchy of the Sciences.

Authors:  Daniele Fanelli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Confirmation bias leads to overestimation of losses of woody plant foliage to insect herbivores in tropical regions.

Authors:  Mikhail V Kozlov; Vitali Zverev; Elena L Zvereva
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2014-12-23       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Metaresearch for Evaluating Reproducibility in Ecology and Evolution.

Authors:  Fiona Fidler; Yung En Chee; Bonnie C Wintle; Mark A Burgman; Michael A McCarthy; Ascelin Gordon
Journal:  Bioscience       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 8.589

9.  Influence of blinding on treatment effect size estimate in randomized controlled trials of oral health interventions.

Authors:  Humam Saltaji; Susan Armijo-Olivo; Greta G Cummings; Maryam Amin; Bruno R da Costa; Carlos Flores-Mir
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-05-18       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Confirmation bias in studies of nestmate recognition: a cautionary note for research into the behaviour of animals.

Authors:  Ellen van Wilgenburg; Mark A Elgar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Estimating the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) of hormetic dose-response relationships in meta-data evaluations.

Authors:  Evgenios Agathokleous; Michael N Moore; Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  MethodsX       Date:  2021-11-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.