Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32742690›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2020

A modern method of multiple working hypotheses to improve inference in ecology.

Scott W Yanco, Andrew McDevitt, Clive N Trueman, Laurel Hartley, Michael B Wunder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Scott W YancoDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4717-9370
Andrew McDevittDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8446-4931
Clive N TruemanOcean and Earth Science, University of Southampton, National Oceanography Centre, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4995-736X
Laurel HartleyDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2001-1108
Michael B WunderDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8063-2408

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Science provides a method to learn about the relationships between observed patterns and the processes that generate them. However, inference can be confounded when an observed pattern cannot be clearly and wholly attributed to a hypothesized process. Over-reliance on traditional single-hypothesis methods (i.e. null hypothesis significance testing) has resulted in replication crises in several disciplines, and ecology exhibits features common to these fields (e.g. low-power study designs, questionable research practices, etc.). Considering multiple working hypotheses in combination with pre-data collection modelling can be an effective means to mitigate many of these problems. We present a framework for explicitly modelling systems in which relevant processes are commonly omitted, overlooked or not considered and provide a formal workflow for a pre-data collection analysis of multiple candidate hypotheses. We advocate for and suggest ways that pre-data collection modelling can be combined with consideration of multiple working hypotheses to improve the efficiency and accuracy of research in ecology.

Indexed as

inferencemodellingmultiple hypothesesscientific methodsimulation models

Identifiers

PMID32742690
PMCPMC7353960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.