![]() Since the reviewer can see the actual analysis, they can inform the editor of the full situation. When a detailed R Markdown report is included, the reviewer can offer a clear, detailed description of their preferred approach and the pros and cons of that approach compared to the author’s approach. Then, the authors test out this possibility, and the reviewer needs to see the result to make sure it matches their concern (the reviewer is so invested now, they might as well keep reviewing for another year). Actually, the reviewer thinks it should be done a different way. The typical flow of reviews goes something like this: A reviewer asks about a specific part of the analytic approach. I have handled several papers that have included R Markdown reports, and the review process is much more efficient. Including an R Markdown report with your submission helps tremendously with the review process. Getting work accepted for publication in a timely fashion is incredibly important to building an academic career, particularly for graduate students and early-career researchers. Of course, I probably need to appeal to your personal interests as an author to initiate behavioural change. Congratulations, we just solved an important cornerstone of the replicability crisis! The reproduction has literally been included as part of the submission. As long as the estimates have been faithfully transferred from the report to the text document (if you are worried about this step, the entire manuscript can be written in R Markdown), then there would be no more question of whether results are reproducible. And we can see the exact parameter estimates that are produced. We can see the exact specification of the statistical model. With these reports, we can see exactly what data is being read into the statistical software. R Markdown reports are one of the rare exceptions. It is rare in academia for there to be a simple foolproof solution to a problem. Feel free to modify and build on the template. I use this set of files as an example of the different formatting choices with my students. I have posted the R Markdown input file, the HTML output, and the data file to OSF. The commands, approach, and output can all be interpreted together to show the flow of analyses. ![]() Simply including the code does not inform the reader as to the full results, the justification for specifications, or the meaning of the estimates.Īs an example, here is what example code often looks like: These features set R Markdown reports apart from the current standard practice of including (example) analytic code. The report can function essentially as a lab notebook, where you jot down new ideas, document problems, and interpret the estimates. Creating a report formalizes the loose statistical interpretation that accompanies most research projects in the early stages. And if that isn’t enough of a carrot, my experience is that R Markdown reports can cut down at least one round of reviews, so give 6 months of your life back (although, EJP has much quicker turnaround times!), and allow reviewers to offer more helpful feedback.Īn R Markdown report is a collection of executed code chunks embedded in descriptive text. In this post, we will see how R Markdown reports can be used to ensure that your results are reproducible, saving you many headaches down the road. Who cares about replicating findings in a new sample if we cannot even reproduce results in the same sample? Reproducibility can be depressingly low. Reproducibility refers to the ability to run the same code on the same data as reported in a paper and find the same results. However, in this post my focus is on a related and even more fundamental topic - reproducibility. A finding is replicable if other researchers in other labs can run the same procedure and find similar results. As has been written about ad nauseum, this paper claiming to have found paranormal powers played an important role in kicking off the replicability crisis in psychology. Our journal club at the time had a spirited conversation about the paper and the general state of the field. I have vivid memories from graduate school of Daryl Bem’s extrasensory perception (ESP) paper being published.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |