Science Forum: Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

B. Aczel*, B. Szaszi*, G. Nilsonne, O.R. van den Akker, C.J. Albers, M.A. van Assen, J.A. Bastiaansen, D. Benjamin, U. Boehm, R. Botvinik-Nezer, L.F. Bringmann, N.A. Busch, E. Caruyer, A.M. Cataldo, N. Cowan, A. Delios, N.N.N. van Dongen, C. Donkin, J.B. van Doorn, A. DreberG. Dutilh, G.F. Egan, M.A. Gernsbacher, R. Hoekstra, S. Hoffmann, F. Holzmeister, J. Huber, M. Johannesson, K.J. Jonas, A.T. Kindel, M. Kirchler, Y.K. Kunkels, D.S. Lindsay, J.F. Mangin, D. Matzke, M.R. Munafo, B.R. Newell, B.A. Nosek, R.A. Poldrack, D. van Ravenzwaaij, J. Rieskamp, M.J. Salganik, A. Sarafoglou, T. Schonberg, M. Schweinsberg, D. Shanks, R. Silberzahn, D.J. Simons, B.A. Spellman, S. St-Jean

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere72185
Number of pages13
JournalElife
Volume10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 9 Nov 2021

Keywords

  • multi-analyst
  • metascience
  • statistical practice
  • science forum
  • expert consensus
  • analytical variability
  • None
  • REPRODUCIBILITY
  • DELPHI

Cite this