An open science peer review oath

Jelena Aleksic, Adrian Alexa Adrian Alexa, Teresa K. Attwood, Neil Chue Hong, Martin Dahlö, Robert Davey, Holger Dinkel, Konrad U. Förstner, Ivo Grigorov, Jean-Karim Hériché, Leo Lahti, Dan MacLean, Michael L. Markie, Jenny Molloy, Maria Victoria Schneider, Camille Scott, Richard Smith-Unna, Bruno Miguel Vieira

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

575 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

One of the foundations of the scientific method is to be able to reproduce
experiments and corroborate the results of research that has been done before.
However, with the increasing complexities of new technologies and techniques,
coupled with the specialisation of experiments, reproducing research findings
has become a growing challenge. Clearly, scientific methods must be
conveyed succinctly, and with clarity and rigour, in order for research to be
reproducible. Here, we propose steps to help increase the transparency of the
scientific method and the reproducibility of research results: specifically, we
introduce a peer-review oath and accompanying manifesto. These have been
designed to offer guidelines to enable reviewers (with the minimum friction or
bias) to follow and apply open science principles, and support the ideas of
transparency, reproducibility and ultimately greater societal impact. Introducing
the oath and manifesto at the stage of peer review will help to check that the research being published includes everything that other researchers would
need to successfully repeat the work. Peer review is the lynchpin of the
publishing system: encouraging the community to consciously (and
conscientiously) uphold these principles should help to improve published
papers, increase confidence in the reproducibility of the work and, ultimately,
provide strategic benefits to authors and their institutions
Original languageEnglish
JournalF1000Research
Issue number3
Pages (from-to)1-14
ISSN2046-1402
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'An open science peer review oath'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this