ArticlePLoS biology2016
Scientists' Reputations Are Based on Getting It Right, Not Being Right.
Article in PLoS biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shedding light on public perceptions of scientists who engage in wrongness admission amidst a failed replication.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2026Article
- Science becomes trustworthy by constantly questioning itself.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Transparency, bias, and reproducibility across science: a meta-research view.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2024Article
- Replication of a local record keeping method for collecting road crash data in low resource settings: lessons from Bangladesh and Nepal.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2024Article
- Improving research quality: the view from the UK Reproducibility Network institutional leads for research improvement.BMC research notes · 2021Article
- Article
- Internal replication of computational workflows in scientific research.Gates open research · 2020Article
- Open Up - the Mission Statement of the Control of Impulsive Action (Ctrl-ImpAct) Lab on Open Science.Psychologica Belgica · 2019Review
- Badges for sharing data and code atF1000Research · 2018Article
- Strong Inference in Mathematical Modeling: A Method for Robust Science in the Twenty-First Century.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Article
- Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral EcologyArticle
- Data sharing in psychology.The American psychologistReview
- Celebrity endorsements in medicine: who should be held liable?Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Replication is vital for increasing precision and accuracy of scientific claims. However, when replications "succeed" or "fail," they could have reputational consequences for the claim's originators. Surveys of United States adults (N = 4,786), undergraduates (N = 428), and researchers (N = 313) showed that reputational assessments of scientists were based more on how they pursue knowledge and respond to replication evidence, not whether the initial results were true. When comparing one scientist that produced boring but certain results with another that produced exciting but uncertain results, opinion favored the former despite researchers' belief in more rewards for the latter. Considering idealized views of scientific practices offers an opportunity to address incentives to reward both innovation and verification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.