首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Human Neuroscience >Do Neuroscience Journals Accept Replications? A Survey of Literature
【24h】

Do Neuroscience Journals Accept Replications? A Survey of Literature

机译:神经科学期刊接受复制吗?文学概论

获取原文
           

摘要

Background : Recent reports in neuroscience, especially those concerning brain-injury and neuroimaging, have revealed low reproducibility of results within the field and urged for more replication studies. However, it is unclear if the neuroscience journals welcome or discourage the submission of reports on replication studies. Therefore, the current study assessed the explicit position of neuroscience journals on replications. Methods : A list of active neuroscience journals publishing in English was compiled from Scopus database. These journal websites were accessed to read their aims and scope and instructions to authors, and to assess if they: (1) explicitly stated that they accept replications; (2) did not state their position on replications; (3) implicitly discouraged replications by emphasizing on the novelty of the manuscripts; or (4) explicitly stated that they reject replications. For journals that explicitly stated they accept or reject replications, their subcategory within neuroscience and their 5-year impact factor were recorded. The distribution of neuroscience replication studies published was also recorded by searching and extracting data from Scopus. Results : Of the 465 journals reviewed, 28 (6.0%) explicitly stated that they accept replications, 394 (84.7%) did not state their position on replications, 40 (8.6%) implicitly discouraged replications by emphasizing on the novelty of the manuscripts, and 3 (0.6%) explicitly stated that they reject replications. For the 28 journals that explicitly welcomed replications, three (10.7%) stated their position in the aims and scope, whereas 25 (89.3%) stated in within the detailed instructions to authors. The five-year impact factor (2015) of these journals ranged from 1.655 to 10.799, and nine of them (32.1%) did not receive a 5-year or annual impact factor in 2015. There was no significant difference in the proportions of journals explicitly welcomed replications (journals with vs. without impact factors, or high vs. low impact factors). All sub-categories of neuroscience had at least a journal that welcomed replications. Discussion : The neuroscience journals that welcomed replications and published replications were reported. These pieces of information may provide descriptive information on the current journal practices regarding replication so the evidence-based recommendations to journal publishers can be made.
机译:背景:神经科学方面的最新报道,尤其是有关脑损伤和神经影像学的报道,揭示了该领域结果的可重复性低,并敦促进行更多的重复研究。但是,尚不清楚神经科学期刊是否欢迎或劝阻有关复制研究的报告的提交。因此,本研究评估了神经科学期刊在复制品上的明确位置。方法:从Scopus数据库中汇编以英语出版的活跃神经科学期刊清单。访问了这些期刊网站,以阅读其目的,范围和对作者的指示,并评估它们是否:(1)明确声明它们接受复制; (2)没有说明其对复制的立场; (3)强调手稿的新颖性,暗中劝阻复制;或(4)明确声明他们拒绝复制。对于明确声明接受或拒绝复制的期刊,将记录其在神经科学领域的子类别及其5年影响因子。还通过搜索和提取Scopus中的数据来记录已发布的神经科学复制研究的分布。结果:在所审查的465种期刊中,有28种(6.0%)明确表示接受复制,394种(84.7%)没有陈述其对复制的立场,有40种(8.6%)通过强调手稿的新颖性隐含了反对复制的意愿, 3(0.6%)明确表示他们拒绝复制。在明确欢迎复制的28种期刊中,有3种(10.7%)表示了它们在目的和范围上的地位,而25种(89.3%)在详细的作者说明中表示。这些期刊的五年影响因子(2015年)介于1.655到10.799之间,其中九个期刊(32.1%)在2015年未获得5年或年度影响因子。期刊比例没有显着差异明确欢迎复制(有或无影响因素的期刊,或有或低影响因素的期刊)。神经科学的所有子类别都有至少一本欢迎复制的期刊。讨论:报告了欢迎复制和出版复制的神经科学期刊。这些信息可以提供有关复制的当前期刊实践的描述性信息,因此可以向期刊出版商提供基于证据的建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号