Enhancing the quality and reproducibility of research: Preferred Evaluation of Cognitive and Neuropsychological Studies - The PECANS statement for human studies.

IF 4.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
C Costa, R Pezzetta, E Toffalini, M Grassi, G Cona, C Miniussi, P J Bauer, S Borgomaneri, M Brysbaert, C D Chambers, N Edelstyn, A Eerland, S J Gilbert, M A Nitsche, R A Poldrack, A Puce, K R Ridderinkhof, T Y Swaab, C Umiltà, M Wiener, C Scarpazza
{"title":"Enhancing the quality and reproducibility of research: Preferred Evaluation of Cognitive and Neuropsychological Studies - The PECANS statement for human studies.","authors":"C Costa, R Pezzetta, E Toffalini, M Grassi, G Cona, C Miniussi, P J Bauer, S Borgomaneri, M Brysbaert, C D Chambers, N Edelstyn, A Eerland, S J Gilbert, M A Nitsche, R A Poldrack, A Puce, K R Ridderinkhof, T Y Swaab, C Umiltà, M Wiener, C Scarpazza","doi":"10.3758/s13428-025-02705-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Are scientific papers providing all essential details necessary to ensure the replicability of study protocols? Are authors effectively conveying study design, data analysis, and the process of drawing inferences from their results? These represent only a fraction of the pressing questions that cognitive psychology and neuropsychology face in addressing the \"crisis of confidence.\" This crisis has highlighted numerous shortcomings in the journey from research to publication. To address these shortcomings, we introduce PECANS (Preferred Evaluation of Cognitive And Neuropsychological Studies), a comprehensive checklist tool designed to guide the planning, execution, evaluation, and reporting of experimental research. PECANS emerged from a rigorous consensus-building process through the Delphi method. We convened a panel of international experts specialized in cognitive psychology and neuropsychology research practices. Through two rounds of iterative voting and a proof-of-concept phase, PECANS evolved into its final form. The PECANS checklist is intended to serve various stakeholders in the fields of cognitive sciences and neuropsychology, including: (i) researchers seeking to ensure and enhance reproducibility and rigor in their research; (ii) journal editors and reviewers assessing the quality of reports; (iii) ethics committees and funding agencies; (iv) students approaching methodology and scientific writing. PECANS is a versatile tool intended not only to improve the quality and transparency of individual research projects but also to foster a broader culture of rigorous scientific inquiry across the academic and research community.</p>","PeriodicalId":8717,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Research Methods","volume":"57 7","pages":"182"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12125112/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02705-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Are scientific papers providing all essential details necessary to ensure the replicability of study protocols? Are authors effectively conveying study design, data analysis, and the process of drawing inferences from their results? These represent only a fraction of the pressing questions that cognitive psychology and neuropsychology face in addressing the "crisis of confidence." This crisis has highlighted numerous shortcomings in the journey from research to publication. To address these shortcomings, we introduce PECANS (Preferred Evaluation of Cognitive And Neuropsychological Studies), a comprehensive checklist tool designed to guide the planning, execution, evaluation, and reporting of experimental research. PECANS emerged from a rigorous consensus-building process through the Delphi method. We convened a panel of international experts specialized in cognitive psychology and neuropsychology research practices. Through two rounds of iterative voting and a proof-of-concept phase, PECANS evolved into its final form. The PECANS checklist is intended to serve various stakeholders in the fields of cognitive sciences and neuropsychology, including: (i) researchers seeking to ensure and enhance reproducibility and rigor in their research; (ii) journal editors and reviewers assessing the quality of reports; (iii) ethics committees and funding agencies; (iv) students approaching methodology and scientific writing. PECANS is a versatile tool intended not only to improve the quality and transparency of individual research projects but also to foster a broader culture of rigorous scientific inquiry across the academic and research community.

提高研究的质量和可重复性:认知和神经心理学研究的首选评估- PECANS对人类研究的声明。
科学论文是否提供了所有必要的细节以确保研究方案的可重复性?作者是否有效地传达了研究设计、数据分析和从结果中得出推论的过程?这些只是认知心理学和神经心理学在解决“信心危机”时所面临的紧迫问题的一小部分。这场危机凸显了从研究到出版的过程中的许多缺陷。为了解决这些缺点,我们引入PECANS(认知和神经心理学研究首选评估),这是一个综合性的检查工具,旨在指导实验研究的计划、执行、评估和报告。PECANS是从通过德尔菲法严格的共识建立过程中产生的。我们召集了一个专门从事认知心理学和神经心理学研究实践的国际专家小组。经过两轮迭代投票和概念验证阶段,PECANS演变成最终形式。PECANS清单旨在为认知科学和神经心理学领域的各种利益相关者提供服务,包括:(i)寻求确保和提高其研究的可重复性和严谨性的研究人员;(ii)期刊编辑和审稿人评估报告质量;(iii)伦理委员会和资助机构;(四)学生接近方法论和科学写作。PECANS是一个多功能的工具,不仅旨在提高单个研究项目的质量和透明度,而且还旨在促进整个学术和研究界更广泛的严谨科学探究文化。
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
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.30%
发文量
266
期刊介绍: Behavior Research Methods publishes articles concerned with the methods, techniques, and instrumentation of research in experimental psychology. The journal focuses particularly on the use of computer technology in psychological research. An annual special issue is devoted to this field.
×
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