Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Matters Arising
  • Published:

Reply to: Recognizing and marshalling the pre-publication error correction potential of open data for more reproducible science

Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 7, pages 1595–1596 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

The Original Article was published on 31 July 2023

replying to R. S. Chen et al. Nature Ecology & Evolution https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-02152-3 (2023)

In a previous paper, we demonstrated a lack of association between open data requirements and post-publication error correction among journals in ecology and evolution1. To facilitate effective data review and error correction, we recommended improving the archiving quality of open datasets, sharing analytical code alongside datasets and destigmatizing error correction among researchers and journal editors.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Berberi, I. & Roche, D. G. No evidence that mandatory open data policies increase error correction. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1630–1633 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen, R. S., Berthelsen, A. L., Brejon Lamartinière, E., Spangenberg, M. C. & Schmoll, T. Recognising and marshalling open data’s pre-publication error correction potential for more reproducible science - A comment on Berberi & Roche. Nat. Ecol. Evol. (2023).

  3. Clark, T. D. et al. Scientific misconduct: the elephant in the lab. A response to Parker et al. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31, 899–900 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Enserink, M. Sea of doubts. Science 372, 560–565 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Enserink, M. Journal declines to retract fish research paper despite fraud finding. Science https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh1493 (2023).

  6. Fernández-Juricic, E. Why sharing data and code during peer review can enhance behavioral ecology research. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 75, 103 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Christian, T. M., Gooch, A., Vision, T. & Hull, E. Journal data policies: exploring how the understanding of editors and authors corresponds to the policies themselves. PLoS ONE 15, e0230281 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Roche, D. G. et al. Paths towards greater consensus building in experimental biology. J. Exp. Biol. 225, jeb243559 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cadwallader, L., Morton, L. & Hryaszkiewicz, I. Trends in preprint, data, and code sharing, 2019–2022. PLoS Blogs https://theplosblog.plos.org/2023/04/open-science-indicators (2023).

  10. Sholler, D., Ram, K., Boettiger, C. & Katz, D. S. Enforcing public data archiving policies in academic publishing: a study of ecology journals. Big Data Soc 6, 2053951719836258 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Montgomerie, R. Data transparency 2020. From the Editor’s Desk of The American Naturalist http://comments.amnat.org/2021/01/note-since-fall-2020-robert-montgomerie.html (2021).

  12. Roche, D. G., Kruuk, L. E. B., Lanfear, R. & Binning, S. A. Public data archiving in ecology and evolution: how well are we doing? PLoS Biol. 13, e1002295 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Roche, D. G. et al. Slow improvement to the archiving quality of open datasets shared by researchers in ecology and evolution. Proc. R. Soc. B 289, 20212780 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Vines, T. H. et al. Mandated data archiving greatly improves access to research data. FASEB J. 27, 1304–1308 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wilkinson, M. D. et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Dance, A. Stop the peer-review treadmill. I want to get off. Nature 614, 581–583 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kratz, J. & Strasser, C. Data publication consensus and controversies. F1000Res 3 (2014).

  18. Thrall, P. H. et al. From raw data to publication: introducing data editing at Ecology Letters. Ecol. Lett. 26, 829–830 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bolnick, D., Vines, T. H. & Montgomerie, R. Ensuring data and code archive quality: why and how? From the Editor’s Desk of The American Naturalist https://comments.amnat.org/2022/03/ensuring-data-and-code-archive-quality (2022).

  20. Lequime, S. Data editing at JEB. JEB blog https://jevbio.net/data-editing-at-jeb/ (2022).

  21. Soeharjono, S. & Roche, D. G. Reported individual costs and benefits of sharing open data among Canadian academic faculty in ecology and evolution. Bioscience 71, 750–756 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Haven, T., Gopalakrishna, G., Tijdink, J., van der Schot, D. & Bouter, L. Promoting trust in research and researchers: how open science and research integrity are intertwined. BMC Res. Notes 15, 302 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Poisot, T., Mounce, R. & Gravel, D. Moving toward a sustainable ecological science: don't let data go to waste!. Ideas Ecol. Evol. 6, 11–19 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rosman, T., Bosnjak, M., Silber, H., Koßmann, J. & Heycke, T. Open science and public trust in science: results from two studies. Public. Underst. Sci. 31, 1046–1062 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    Ilias Berberi & Dominique G. Roche

  2. Institut de Biologie, Université de Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland

    Dominique G. Roche

Authors
  1. Ilias Berberi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dominique G. Roche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

I.B. and D.G.R. wrote and edited the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ilias Berberi.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

D.G.R. is a member of the Canadian Institute for Ecology and Evolution’s Living Data Project and a co-founder and past president of the Society for Open, Reliable and Transparent Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (www.sortee.org). I.B. declares no competing interests. D.G.R. was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement no. 838237-OPTIMISE.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Berberi, I., Roche, D.G. Reply to: Recognizing and marshalling the pre-publication error correction potential of open data for more reproducible science. Nat Ecol Evol 7, 1595–1596 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-02142-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-02142-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene