Transparency and disclosure, neutrality and balance: shared values or just shared words?

Area of Science:

• Scientific methodology
• Research ethics
• Risk assessment

Background:

• Values inherently influence scientific methodology, risk assessment, and inference.
• Current calls for objectivity in research are often vague and difficult to attain.
• Transparency and neutrality are widely valued research qualities.

Purpose of the Study:

• To propose replacing vague objectivity with precise operational qualities in scientific research.
• To evaluate researcher conformity to valued qualities like transparency and neutrality.
• To highlight the need for clearer explication and implementation of research values.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of how values shape methodology and risk assessment.
• Evaluation of researcher adherence to transparency and neutrality through report disclosure and methodology.
• Case study examining differing practical interpretations of shared values by authors.

Main Results:

• Vague objectivity is insufficient; precise operational qualities are necessary.
• Transparency and neutrality require clear definitions and consistent application.
• Author interpretations of transparency and neutrality can diverge significantly even when values appear shared.

Conclusions:

• Explicating and implementing research values like transparency and neutrality requires greater precision.
• Methodology and reporting must clearly demonstrate adherence to defined operational qualities.
• Improved clarity in defining and applying research values enhances scientific rigor and reader trust.