Dan and James discuss a new paper in the inaugural issue of Nature Human Behaviour, "A manifesto for reproducible science".
Some of the topics covered:
What's a manfesto for reproducibility doing in a Nature group journal?
Registered reports
The importance of incentives to actually make change happen
What people should report vs. what they actually report
A common pitfall of published meta-analyses
The reliance of metrics in hiring decisions and the impact of open science practices
Tone police
How do we transition to open science practices?
SSRN preprints being bought by Elsevier
Authors getting gouged by copyediting costs (and solutions)
Does being 'double-blind' extend to doing your analysis blind
Trial monitoring is expensive
Links
The paper
http://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-016-0021
Our paper on reporting standards in heart rate variability
http://www.nature.com/tp/journal/v6/n5/full/tp201673a.html
Equator guidelines
http://www.equator-network.org
Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/
Twitter account
https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast