Six well-qualified hydrologies and water resources magazines were published in 2017, an estimated percentage of research, so that the results could be fully reproduced between 0.06 and 6.8 percent. This low level of replication is not uncommon in hydrological studies – many scientists recognize it as easily. However, Utah State University research team has found a solution to play these studies.
"The availability of data and research on the reproduction of hydrology and water resources", a copy of the study published by David Rosenberg on February 26, published in Scientific Data, was published as an online survey on the reproduction of published research. The team reviewed 360 articles from six water resources magazines published in 2017. Outside of 360 articles, they could only be played out of four articles.
"Our survey tool replaces the concept of scientific discipline replication that reduces the specific components of data availability, the reproducibility of results, and the replicability of discoveries," said Rosenberg, associate professor of science and environmental engineering at the USU. "Later writers, magazines, founders and organizations may use a survey tool to add low reproduction rates."
The authors can say that the playback is divided into three components:
- Do you have data, models, codes, instructions for use and other objects used in the work?
- Can artifacts be used to play published results?
- Can the discoveries be replicated with new data sets?
The Group's online survey tool consists of 15 questions, and it provides a list of the essential elements of artifact utility and search results. Artifacts is a term that includes the necessary data, software, models, codes, directions and other material to reproduce the results of an analysis study.
The group found around 70% of the selected articles that some of the materials were useful but only 48% of the materials could be included online. Only six per cent of sampling articles were made publicly accessible artifacts, and only one percent of sampling artifacts were made and could be reproduced completely.
The authors published many articles to create the results. If the authors give instructions, they say, the number of articles that can be tested for playback would be doubled. All artifacts that have articles available have played six or all of the ones that were played. The group asked two articles in the survey to explain how artifacts could be accessed, and the four magazines prompted statements. There are not magazines that require authors to make all the artifacts.
The Survey Tool can help you to recognize and promote playback levels. For example, authors can use the survey tool to perform self-evaluation of their playback results. Rosenberg and his team also recommend a medal system to identify different repetition levels:
- Bronze medal: all artifacts are available in the article or in open warehouses
- Silver Medal: All Artifacts are available and the results are fully reproduced
- Gold medal: results are fully reproduced and general discoveries can be repeated in different settings with the same or different artifacts
Rosenberg recommends posting medal icons next to online articles to acknowledge the author of the play and make it easier for readers to find top playback practices. Rosenberg and his team analyzed 360 articles that awarded four silver medals and six bronze medals. Providing the gold medal is still an important line of work for the discovery of profitability.
"We hope the Survey Tool helps nudge authors, magazines, funders and organizations to play scientific work," said Rosenberg. "The debate on improving the survey tool is welcomed and improving our science's reproduction."
Materials provided by materials Utah State University. Originally written by Lexie Richins. Note: Content can be edited by style and length.