Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Evolución Molecular , Genómica/métodos , Genómica/tendencias , Mutación , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Animales , Automatización/métodos , Número Básico de Reproducción , COVID-19/inmunología , COVID-19/transmisión , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Genoma Viral/genética , Humanos , Visón/virología , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Filogenia , Salud Pública/métodos , Salud Pública/tendencias , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidad , Medios de Comunicación Sociales , IncertidumbreRESUMEN
A focus on novel, confirmatory, and statistically significant results leads to substantial bias in the scientific literature. One type of bias, known as "p-hacking," occurs when researchers collect or select data or statistical analyses until nonsignificant results become significant. Here, we use text-mining to demonstrate that p-hacking is widespread throughout science. We then illustrate how one can test for p-hacking when performing a meta-analysis and show that, while p-hacking is probably common, its effect seems to be weak relative to the real effect sizes being measured. This result suggests that p-hacking probably does not drastically alter scientific consensuses drawn from meta-analyses.
Asunto(s)
Metaanálisis como Asunto , Sesgo de Publicación , Ciencia/ética , Humanos , Ciencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Estadística como AsuntoRESUMEN
Women continue to be under-represented in the sciences, with their representation declining at each progressive academic level. These differences persist despite long-running policies to ameliorate gender inequity. We compared gender differences in exposure and visibility at an evolutionary biology conference for attendees at two different academic levels: student and post-PhD academic. Despite there being almost exactly a 1:1 ratio of women and men attending the conference, we found that when considering only those who presented talks, women spoke for far less time than men of an equivalent academic level: on average student women presented for 23% less time than student men, and academic women presented for 17% less time than academic men. We conducted more detailed analyses to tease apart whether this gender difference was caused by decisions made by the attendees or through bias in evaluation of the abstracts. At both academic levels, women and men were equally likely to request a presentation. However, women were more likely than men to prefer a short talk, regardless of academic level. We discuss potential underlying reasons for this gender bias, and provide recommendations to avoid similar gender biases at future conferences.