Improving the reproducibility and integrity of research: what can different stakeholders contribute?

Citation metadata

Author: Malcolm Macleod
Date: Apr. 25, 2022
From: BMC Research Notes(Vol. 15, Issue 1)
Publisher: BioMed Central Ltd.
Document Type: Report
Length: 2,704 words
Lexile Measure: 1490L

Document controls

Main content

Abstract :

Increasing awareness of problems with the reproducibility and integrity of research led the UK Parliament Science and Technology Committee to launch, in July 2021, an inquiry into reproducibility and research integrity. We recognise at least four potential reasons why attempts to replicate a research finding may be unsuccessful: false positive statistical analyses, low generalisability of findings, suboptimal study designs (research integrity), and deliberate malfeasance (researcher integrity). It is important to make a distinction between the contributions of research integrity and of researcher integrity to the reproducibility crisis. While the impact of an individual instance of compromised researcher integrity is substantial, the aggregate impact of more prevalent problems with research integrity is likely much greater. The research community will be most efficient when failed replication efforts are never due to issues of research integrity or of researcher integrity, as this would allow focus on the scientific reasons for why two apparently similar experiments should reach different conclusions. We discuss the role of funders, institutions and government in addressing the "reproducibility crisis" before considering which interventions might have a positive impact on academia's approach to reproducible research, and a possible role for a committee on research integrity. Keywords: Research integrity, Researcher integrity, Research improvement, Research reproducibility

Source Citation

Source Citation   

Gale Document Number: GALE|A701613726