Statistics in service of metascience: Measuring replication distance with reproducibility rate

Erkan Buzbas, Berna Devezer
{"title":"Statistics in service of metascience: Measuring replication distance with reproducibility rate","authors":"Erkan Buzbas, Berna Devezer","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.05.606644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Motivated by the recent putative reproducibility crisis, we discuss the relationship between replicability of scientific studies, reproducibility of results obtained in these replications, and the philosophy of statistics. Our approach focuses on challenges in specifying scientific studies for scientific inference via statistical inference, and is complementary to classical discussions in philosophy of statistics. We particularly consider the challenges in replicating studies exactly, using the notion of the idealized experiment. We argue against treating reproducibility as an inherently desirable property of scientific results, and in favor of viewing it as a tool to measure distance between an original study and its replications. To sensibly study the implications of replicability and results reproducibility on inference, such a measure of replication distance is needed. We present an effort to delineate such a framework here, addressing some challenges in capturing the components of scientific studies while identifying others as ongoing issues. We illustrate our measure of replication distance by simulations using a toy example. Rather than replications, we present purposefully planned modifications as an appropriate tool to inform scientific inquiry. Our ability to measure replication distance serves scientists in their search for replication-ready studies. We believe that likelihood-based and evidential approaches may play a critical role towards building a statistics that effectively serves the practical needs of science.","PeriodicalId":501568,"journal":{"name":"bioRxiv - Scientific Communication and Education","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"bioRxiv - Scientific Communication and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.05.606644","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Motivated by the recent putative reproducibility crisis, we discuss the relationship between replicability of scientific studies, reproducibility of results obtained in these replications, and the philosophy of statistics. Our approach focuses on challenges in specifying scientific studies for scientific inference via statistical inference, and is complementary to classical discussions in philosophy of statistics. We particularly consider the challenges in replicating studies exactly, using the notion of the idealized experiment. We argue against treating reproducibility as an inherently desirable property of scientific results, and in favor of viewing it as a tool to measure distance between an original study and its replications. To sensibly study the implications of replicability and results reproducibility on inference, such a measure of replication distance is needed. We present an effort to delineate such a framework here, addressing some challenges in capturing the components of scientific studies while identifying others as ongoing issues. We illustrate our measure of replication distance by simulations using a toy example. Rather than replications, we present purposefully planned modifications as an appropriate tool to inform scientific inquiry. Our ability to measure replication distance serves scientists in their search for replication-ready studies. We believe that likelihood-based and evidential approaches may play a critical role towards building a statistics that effectively serves the practical needs of science.
统计服务于元科学:用再现率衡量复制距离
受最近假定的可重复性危机的启发,我们讨论了科学研究的可重复性、在这些重复中获得的结果的可重复性与统计学哲学之间的关系。我们的研究方法侧重于通过统计推断进行科学推断的具体科学研究所面临的挑战,与统计哲学的经典讨论相辅相成。我们使用理想化实验的概念,特别考虑了精确复制研究的挑战。我们反对将可重复性视为科学成果的内在理想属性,而赞成将其视为衡量原始研究与其复制之间距离的工具。为了合理地研究可重复性和结果可重复性对推论的影响,我们需要这样一种衡量复制距离的方法。我们在此提出了构建这样一个框架的努力,解决了在捕捉科学研究要素方面的一些难题,同时也指出了其他一些仍需解决的问题。我们通过一个玩具实例的模拟来说明我们的复制距离测量方法。与其说是复制,不如说是有目的有计划的修改,是为科学探索提供信息的适当工具。我们测量复制距离的能力有助于科学家寻找可复制的研究。我们相信,基于似然法和证据法可以在建立有效满足科学实际需求的统计方法方面发挥关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信