Reproducibility, Replication and Questionable Research Practices in Studies from Mexican and Guatemalan Peer-reviewed Scholarly Journals
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36314/cunori.v6i1.181Keywords:
reproducibility, replication, questionable research practices, publication bias, peer-reviewed scholarly journals, Mexico, GuatemalaAbstract
AIMS: To assess whether studies published in recently created Mexican and Guatemala peer-reviewed scholarly journals can be reproduced. Likewise, it was aimed to assess whether replication of studies is made. Additionally, whether questionable research practices and publication bias are present. METHOD: This study employed a quantitative, descriptive, and cross-sectional research design. It was gathered a convenience sample that consisted of 20 studies from Mexico and 10 from Guatemala, one per journal created in 2021. RESULTS: It was found that no study in the sample can be reproduced. Likewise, replication of other studies is absent. It was discovered that questionable research practices were present in few studies. Furthermore, it wasn’t observed publication bias in studies. CONCLUSION: We concluded that reproducibility and replication of studies are not popular among recently created peer-reviewed scholarly journals. It’s worrisome that results from studies cannot be verified. Likewise, it's also alarming that replication of studies in recently created journals is absent. Publishers must address these issues as soon as possible.
Downloads
References
Baker, M. (2016) Is there a reproducibility crisis? A Nature survey lifts the lid on how researchers view the ‘crisis rocking science and what they think will help. Nature, 533 (7604), 452-455. https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a
Barba, L.A. (2018). Terminologies for Reproducible Research. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1802.03311
Begley, C. G., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2015) Reproducibility in science. Circulation research, 116 (1). 116-126. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819
Bouter, L.M., Tijdink, J., Axelsen, N., Martinson, B. C., & ter Riet, G. (2016). Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1 (17). 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5
Dickersin, K. (1990) The Existence of Publication Bias and Risk Factors for Its Occurrence. JAMA, 263 (10). 1385–1389. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1990.03440100097014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.263.10.1385
John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measures the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 23 (5). 524-532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611430953 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611430953
Joober, R., Schmitz, N., Annable, L., & Boksa, P. (2012). Publication bias: what are the challenges and can they be overcome? Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience: JPN, 37(3), 149–152. https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.120065 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.120065
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2019). Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25303 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/25303
Neuliep, J. W., and Crandall, R. (1990). Editorial bias against replication research. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality. 5, 85–90
Patil, P., Peng, R. D., & Leek, J. (2016). A statistical definition for reproducibility and replicability. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/066803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/066803
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (2018). Replication Studies. Improving Reproducibility in the Empirical Sciences. KNAW
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Humberto Emilio Aguilera Arévalo y María Guadalupe Ramírez Contreras
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Los autores/as que publiquen en esta revista aceptan las siguientes condiciones:
- Los autores/as conservan los derechos de autor y ceden a la revista el derecho de la primera publicación, con el trabajo registrado con la licencia de atribución de Creative Commons 4.0, que permite a terceros utilizar lo publicado siempre que mencionen la autoría del trabajo y a la primera publicación en esta revista.
- Los autores/as pueden realizar otros acuerdos contractuales independientes y adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del artículo publicado en esta revista (p. ej., incluirlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro) siempre que indiquen claramente que el trabajo se publicó por primera vez en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as a compartir su trabajo en línea (por ejemplo: en repositorios institucionales o páginas web personales) antes y durante el proceso de envío del manuscrito, ya que puede conducir a intercambios productivos, a una mayor y más rápida citación del trabajo publicado (vea The Effect of Open Access).
- Se permite a los autores la publicación de erratas y por otra parte se responsabilizan de la retractación de artículos.
