Premium
A few simple steps to improve the description of group results in neuroscience
Author(s) -
Rousselet Guillaume A.,
Foxe John J.,
Bolam J. Paul
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
european journal of neuroscience
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.346
H-Index - 206
eISSN - 1460-9568
pISSN - 0953-816X
DOI - 10.1111/ejn.13400
Subject(s) - computer science , set (abstract data type) , representation (politics) , simple (philosophy) , openness to experience , transparency (behavior) , data science , psychology , epistemology , social psychology , philosophy , computer security , politics , political science , law , programming language
There are many changes necessary to improve the quality of neuroscience research. Suggestions abound to increase openness, transparency and reproducibility (Pernet & Poline, 2015; Gorgolewski & Poldrack, 2016; McKiernan et al., 2016; Spires-Jones et al., 2016) (Weissgerber et al., 2016), to promote better experimental designs and analyses, and educate researchers about statistical inferences (Kerr, 1998; Wagenmakers, 2007; Nieuwenhuis et al., 2011; Button et al., 2013; Head et al., 2015). These changes are necessary but will take time to implement. As part of this process we would like to propose a few simple steps to improve the assessment of statistical results in neuroscience, by focusing on detailed graphical representations.