Framework for advancing rigorous research

Koroshetz, Walter J.; Behrman, Shannon; Brame, Cynthia J.; Branchaw, Janet; Brown, Emery N.; Clark, Erin; Dockterman, David; Green, Katelyn M.; Hsi, Sherry; Kaplitt, Michael G.; Kolber, Benedict J.; Kolodkin, Alex L.; Lipscombe, Diane; Macleod, Malcolm; McKinney, Caleb; Munafò, Marcus R.; Oakley, Barbara; Olimpo, Jeffrey T.; Sert, Nathalie Percie du; Raman, Indira M.; Riley, Ceri; Shelton, Amy L.; Uzzo, Stephen; Crawford, Devon C.; Silberberg, Shai D.

doi:10.7554/elife.55915

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There has been much discussion about problems with reproducibility and rigor in the scientific literature ( Landis et al, 2012 ; Plant et al, 2014 ; Nature, 2013 ; Nosek and Errington, 2017 ; Koroshetz et al, 2020 ). Historically, a powerful means to ensure reliability of published data has been to develop community standards.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to measure and evaluate binding affinities

Jarmoskaite

AlSadhan

Vaidyanathan

et al. 2020

eLife

369

304

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantitative measurements of biomolecule associations are central to biological understanding and are needed to build and test predictive and mechanistic models. Given the advances in high-throughput technologies and the projected increase in the availability of binding data, we found it especially timely to evaluate the current standards for performing and reporting binding measurements. A review of 100 studies revealed that in most cases essential controls for establishing the appropriate incubation time and concentration regime were not documented, making it impossible to determine measurement reliability. Moreover, several reported affinities could be concluded to be incorrect, thereby impacting biological interpretations. Given these challenges, we provide a framework for a broad range of researchers to evaluate, teach about, perform, and clearly document high-quality equilibrium binding measurements. We apply this framework and explain underlying fundamental concepts through experimental examples with the RNA-binding protein Puf4.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to measure and evaluate binding affinities

Jarmoskaite

AlSadhan

Vaidyanathan

et al. 2020

eLife

369

304

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other measures that might influence dustbathing, such as moisture content, analogous measurements for degree of substrate friability, or lipid content were all lacking from the examined studies, and may have contributed to the low precision of the dustbathing model. Reporting measurable or observable substrate characteristics that may influence Galliformes' preferences can contribute to understanding reported observations, improve study reproducibility ( 65 ), and applicability across species. Despite chickens' preference for sand and peat moss, farmers are reticent to their use due to labor requirements, wear and tear on equipment, cost, accessibility and unsustainability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Floor Substrate Preferences of Chickens: A Meta-Analysis

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental enrichment promotes sensory and motor stimulation for species-typical behaviors, which in turn enhance animal well-being. For farmed Galliformes, housing systems often limit enrichment to bedding and litter, that simultaneously act as material for dustbathing and foraging. Therefore, this meta-analysis sought to systematically review and synthesize the substrate preference test literature for Galliformes. Data based on the following four welfare-related behaviors were extracted for analysis: (1) dustbathing, (2) foraging, (3) pecking, and (4) time spent on a given substrate. Literature searches in CAB Direct, Web of Science, and Google Scholar yielded 239 articles, and hand searching yielded an additional five articles. Ten publications that used different chicken strains as test subjects, met the criteria to be included in the systematic review. The effects of bedding type, the number of days birds had access to tested substrates, enclosure area, and substrate area, on the examined behaviors were determined. We found that birds preferred dustbathing in sand and peat moss more than on any other substrates. The bedding type, size of the enclosure, and size of the substrate area affected the amount of time that birds spent on the tested substrates. When provided the choice between bedding materials, birds spent more time on sand or peat moss than on any other substrate or on no substrate. Notably, most studies did not report relevant physical or chemical characteristics of substrate that may influence birds' preferences, such as grain size, moisture content and the level of soiling. Focusing future studies on identifying substrate characteristics that influence preferences can lead to the discovery of new, practical, enriching beddings that can be easily implemented in housing systems for Galliformes.

show abstract

“…Существуют и иные позиции относительно подходов развития, исследуемого объекта. К примеру, коллектив авторов из США указывает на необходимость создания сообществ «ревностных защитников строгости научных исследований» [16]. Таким образом, наглядно продемонстрирована двухуровневая стратегия по развитию исследовательской культуры: формальная и неформальная.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Взаимосвязь Совершенствования Исследовательской Культуры С Развитием Научного Стиля Мышления У Преподавателей

Николов¹

2021

Гуманитарные Науки

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Было выявлено, что исследовательская культура, а также научный стиль мышления совершенно очевидно различные понятия. В рамках текущей работы исследовательская культура рассматривается, как более общее понятие по отношению к феномену научный стиль мышления. При этом подходы по развитию, рассматриваемых явлений, принципиально не отличаются. При развитии исследовательской культуры изменению подвергаются не только стратегии когнитивных процессов. Развитие исследовательской культуры также затрагивает волевые и эмоционально-психические процессы. Сверх указанного отмечается, что совершенствование научного стиля мышления также неизменно влечёт к изменению когнитивные, эмоциональные и волевые психические процессы. Таким образом, была выявлена определённая дихотомия рассматриваемых явлений, что означает их внутренне родство, тогда как их внешняя сторона указывает на глубокую разницу между объектами. Подобный факт можно отнести к психолого-педагогической апории.Ключевые слова: научный стиль мышления, преподаватель, профессиональное совершенствование, исследовательская культура.

show abstract

Framework for advancing rigorous research

Cited by 24 publications

References 43 publications

How to measure and evaluate binding affinities

How to measure and evaluate binding affinities

Floor Substrate Preferences of Chickens: A Meta-Analysis

Взаимосвязь Совершенствования Исследовательской Культуры С Развитием Научного Стиля Мышления У Преподавателей

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About