One of the pathways by which the scientific community confirms the validity of a new scientific discovery is by repeating the research that produced it. When a scientific effort fails to independently confirm the computations or results of a previous study, some fear that it may be a symptom of a lack of rigor in science, while others argue that such an observed inconsistency can be an important precursor to new discovery. Concerns about reproducibility and replicability have been expressed in both scientific and popular media. As these concerns came to light, Congress requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conduct a study to assess the extent of issues related to reproducibility and replicability and to offer recommendations for improving rigor and transparency in scientific research. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science defines reproducibility and replicability and examines the factors that may lead to non-reproducibility and non-replicability in research. Unlike the typical expectation of reproducibility between two computations, expectations about replicability are more nuanced, and in some cases a lack of replicability can aid the process of scientific discovery. This report provides recommendations to researchers, academic institutions, journals, and funders on steps they can take to improve reproducibility and replicability in science.

The integrity of knowledge that emerges from research is based on individual and collective adherence to core values of objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. Integrity in science means that the organizations in which research is conducted encourage those involved to exemplify these values in every step of the research process. Understanding the dynamics that support â€" or distort â€" practices that uphold the integrity of research by all participants ensures that the research enterprise advances knowledge. The 1992 report Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process evaluated issues related to scientific responsibility and the conduct of research. It provided a valuable service in describing and analyzing a very complicated set of issues, and has served as a crucial basis for thinking about research integrity for more than two decades. However, as experience has accumulated with various forms of research misconduct, detrimental research practices, and other forms of misconduct, as subsequent empirical research has revealed more about the nature of scientific misconduct, and because technological and social changes have altered the environment in which science is conducted, it is clear that the framework established more than two decades ago needs to be updated. Responsible Science served as a valuable benchmark to set the context for this most recent analysis and to help guide the committee's thought process. Fostering Integrity in Research identifies best practices in research and recommends practical options for discouraging and addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices.

Development Research in Practice leads the reader through a complete empirical research project, providing links to continuously updated resources on the DIME Wiki as well as illustrative examples from the Demand for Safe Spaces study. The handbook is intended to train users of development data how to handle data effectively, efficiently, and ethically. “In the DIME Analytics Data Handbook, the DIME team has produced an extraordinary public good: a detailed, comprehensive, yet easy-to-read manual for how to manage a data-oriented research project from beginning to end. It offers everything from big-picture guidance on the determinants of high-quality empirical research, to specific practical guidance on how to implement specific workflows—and includes computer code! I think it will prove durably useful to a broad range of researchers in international development and beyond, and I learned new practices that I plan on adopting in my own research group.†? —Marshall Burke, Associate Professor, Department of Earth System Science, and Deputy Director, Center on Food Security and the Environment, Stanford University “Data are the essential ingredient in any research or evaluation project, yet there has been too little attention to standardized practices to ensure high-quality data collection, handling, documentation, and exchange. Development Research in Practice: The DIME Analytics Data Handbook seeks to fill that gap with practical guidance and tools, grounded in ethics and efficiency, for data management at every stage in a research project. This excellent resource sets a new standard for the field and is an essential reference for all empirical researchers.†? —Ruth E. Levine, PhD, CEO, IDinsight “Development Research in Practice: The DIME Analytics Data Handbook is an important resource and a must-read for all development economists, empirical social scientists, and public policy analysts. Based on decades of pioneering work at the World Bank on data collection, measurement, and analysis, the handbook provides valuable tools to allow research teams to more efficiently and transparently manage their work flows—yielding more credible analytical conclusions as a result.†? —Edward Miguel, Oxfam Professor in Environmental and Resource Economics and Faculty Director of the Center for Effective Global Action, University of California, Berkeley “The DIME Analytics Data Handbook is a must-read for any data-driven researcher looking to create credible research outcomes and policy advice. By meticulously describing detailed steps, from project planning via ethical and responsible code and data practices to the publication of research papers and associated replication packages, the DIME handbook makes the complexities of transparent and credible research easier.†? —Lars Vilhuber, Data Editor, American Economic Association, and Executive Director, Labor Dynamics Institute, Cornell University

Questions about the reproducibility of scientific research have been raised in numerous settings and have gained visibility through several high-profile journal and popular press articles. Quantitative issues contributing to reproducibility challenges have been considered (including improper data measurement and analysis, inadequate statistical expertise, and incomplete data, among others), but there is no clear consensus on how best to approach or to minimize these problems. A lack of reproducibility of scientific results has created some distrust in scientific findings among the general public, scientists, funding agencies, and industries. While studies fail for a variety of reasons, many factors contribute to the lack of perfect reproducibility, including insufficient training in experimental design, misaligned incentives for publication and the implications for university tenure, intentional manipulation, poor data management and analysis, and inadequate instances of statistical inference. The workshop summarized in this report was designed not to address the social and experimental challenges but instead to focus on the latter issues of improper data management and analysis, inadequate statistical expertise, incomplete data, and difficulties applying sound statistic inference to the available data. Many efforts have emerged over recent years to draw attention to and improve reproducibility of scientific work. This report uniquely focuses on the statistical perspective of three issues: the extent of reproducibility, the causes of reproducibility failures, and the potential remedies for these failures.

"Based on a recommendation from the Technical Working Group on Fast Reactors, this publication is a regular update of previous publications on fast reactor technology. The publication provides comprehensive and detailed information on the technology of fast neutron reactors. The focus is on practical issues that are useful to engineers, scientists, managers, university students and professors. The main issues of discussion are experience in design, construction, operation and decommissioning, various areas of research and development, engineering, safety and national strategies, and public acceptance of fast reactors. In the summary the reader will find national strategies, international initiatives on innovative (i.e. Generation IV) systems and an assessment of public acceptance as related to fast reactors."--Résumé de l'éditeur.