Evidence of Experimental Bias in the Life Sciences: Why We Need Blind Data Recording

Download
Author
Holman, L; Head, ML; Lanfear, R; Jennions, MDDate
2015-07-01Source Title
PLoS BiologyPublisher
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCEUniversity of Melbourne Author/s
Holman, LukeAffiliation
School of BioSciencesMetadata
Show full item recordDocument Type
Journal ArticleCitations
Holman, L., Head, M. L., Lanfear, R. & Jennions, M. D. (2015). Evidence of Experimental Bias in the Life Sciences: Why We Need Blind Data Recording. PLOS BIOLOGY, 13 (7), https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002190.Access Status
Open AccessARC Grant code
ARC/DE140101481Abstract
Observer bias and other "experimenter effects" occur when researchers' expectations influence study outcome. These biases are strongest when researchers expect a particular result, are measuring subjective variables, and have an incentive to produce data that confirm predictions. To minimize bias, it is good practice to work "blind," meaning that experimenters are unaware of the identity or treatment group of their subjects while conducting research. Here, using text mining and a literature review, we find evidence that blind protocols are uncommon in the life sciences and that nonblind studies tend to report higher effect sizes and more significant p-values. We discuss methods to minimize bias and urge researchers, editors, and peer reviewers to keep blind protocols in mind.
Export Reference in RIS Format
Endnote
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".
Refworks
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References