Predicting reliability through structured expert elicitation with the repliCATS (Collaborative Assessments for Trustworthy Science) process.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
17
02
2021
accepted:
27
08
2022
entrez:
26
1
2023
pubmed:
27
1
2023
medline:
31
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
As replications of individual studies are resource intensive, techniques for predicting the replicability are required. We introduce the repliCATS (Collaborative Assessments for Trustworthy Science) process, a new method for eliciting expert predictions about the replicability of research. This process is a structured expert elicitation approach based on a modified Delphi technique applied to the evaluation of research claims in social and behavioural sciences. The utility of processes to predict replicability is their capacity to test scientific claims without the costs of full replication. Experimental data supports the validity of this process, with a validation study producing a classification accuracy of 84% and an Area Under the Curve of 0.94, meeting or exceeding the accuracy of other techniques used to predict replicability. The repliCATS process provides other benefits. It is highly scalable, able to be deployed for both rapid assessment of small numbers of claims, and assessment of high volumes of claims over an extended period through an online elicitation platform, having been used to assess 3000 research claims over an 18 month period. It is available to be implemented in a range of ways and we describe one such implementation. An important advantage of the repliCATS process is that it collects qualitative data that has the potential to provide insight in understanding the limits of generalizability of scientific claims. The primary limitation of the repliCATS process is its reliance on human-derived predictions with consequent costs in terms of participant fatigue although careful design can minimise these costs. The repliCATS process has potential applications in alternative peer review and in the allocation of effort for replication studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36701303
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274429
pii: PONE-D-21-05317
pmc: PMC9879480
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0274429Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Fraser et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Science. 2015 Aug 28;349(6251):aac4716
pubmed: 26315443
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 May 19;117(20):10762-10768
pubmed: 32366645
Risk Anal. 2018 Sep;38(9):1781-1794
pubmed: 29665625
BMC Med. 2016 Jun 10;14(1):85
pubmed: 27287500
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 May;10(3):267-81
pubmed: 25987508
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Dec 15;112(50):15343-7
pubmed: 26553988
PLoS Med. 2007 Jan;4(1):e40
pubmed: 17411314
Psychol Methods. 2021 Dec 20;:
pubmed: 34928679
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2015 Mar;21(1):1-14
pubmed: 25581088
Ecol Appl. 2020 Jun;30(4):e02075
pubmed: 31971641
Science. 2015 Jun 26;348(6242):1422-5
pubmed: 26113702
JAMA. 1994 Jul 13;272(2):96-7
pubmed: 8015140
PLoS One. 2019 Dec 5;14(12):e0225826
pubmed: 31805105
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat. 2021 Mar-Apr;13(2):
pubmed: 33777310
Elife. 2020 Nov 19;9:
pubmed: 33211009
Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:623-55
pubmed: 14744229
PLoS Biol. 2017 Jun 29;15(6):e2002212
pubmed: 28662052
Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Sep;2(9):637-644
pubmed: 31346273
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2004 Mar;30(2):299-314
pubmed: 14979805
PLoS One. 2021 Sep 2;16(9):e0256919
pubmed: 34473784
Risk Anal. 2010 Mar;30(3):512-23
pubmed: 20030766
BMC Med. 2014 Jul 30;12:128
pubmed: 25285376
Elife. 2019 Oct 31;8:
pubmed: 31668163
Behav Brain Sci. 2018 Jan;41:e124
pubmed: 31064512
Science. 2016 Mar 25;351(6280):1433-6
pubmed: 26940865
BMC Res Notes. 2022 Apr 5;15(1):127
pubmed: 35382867