Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

The Scientific Method

The Scientific Method

The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...

The Scientific Method

The Scientific Method

Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.

The Scientific Method

The Scientific Method

Chemistry is an empirical science. Scientists often pose questions to understand the chemistry in everyday life and seek answers to these questions. To achieve this, scientists follow a definitive series of steps that together make up the Scientific Method. This approach involves making observations, asking questions, building a hypothesis, conducting experiments, analyzing results, and forming a conclusion.

Scientific Nature of Social Psychology

Scientific Nature of Social Psychology

Social psychology is a scientific discipline dedicated to understanding how individuals think, feel, and behave in social contexts. Unlike common sense, which relies on anecdotal experiences and intuition, social psychology employs systematic research and empirical methods to ensure objectivity and reliability. This distinction is fundamental in distinguishing scientifically supported findings from mere speculation.Four fundamental scientific values guide a structured approach to research in...

Proofreading

Proofreading

Feedback Loops

Feedback Loops

In most cases, excessive hormone production is prevented by negative feedback—a loop that starts with a stimulus inducing the release of a particular substance, like a hormone, to maintain a certain level before triggering a signal that results in a decrease in further release of the hormone.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Higher abundance of <i>Faecalibacterium prausnitzii</i> in the gut microbiome is associated with a lower risk of sepsis development among 6,372 individuals followed for 20 years.

mSystems·2026

Same author

Substrate and target selectivity of 4'-fluoroadenosine against viral and host polymerases.

The Journal of biological chemistry·2026

Same author

Oat-rich low-gluten diet modulates plasma short-chain fatty acids without significant changes in fecal microbiome or inflammatory markers - a randomized clinical trial in people with cardiometabolic risk.

The Journal of nutrition·2026

Same author

Reconstructing community dynamics from limited observations.

Microbiome·2026

Same author

Substrate and target selectivity of 4'-fluoroadenosine against viral and host polymerases.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026

Same author

Synchronous spatiotemporal control of autophagy and organelle trafficking is necessary for infection by Magnaporthe oryzae.

Cell reports·2026

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 17, 2026

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

An open science peer review oath.

Jelena Aleksic¹, Adrian Alexa², Teresa K Attwood³

¹Wellcome Trust - Medical Research Council Cambridge Stem Cell Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1QR, UK.

|February 10, 2015

Summary

Reproducing scientific experiments is challenging due to increasing complexity. This study proposes a peer-review oath and manifesto to enhance transparency and reproducibility in research, fostering greater societal impact.

More Related Videos

Shotgun Proteomics Sample Processing Automated by an Open-Source Lab Robot

Shotgun Proteomics Sample Processing Automated by an Open-Source Lab Robot

Published on: October 28, 2021

Biobank for Translational Medicine: Standard Operating Procedures for Optimal Sample Management

Biobank for Translational Medicine: Standard Operating Procedures for Optimal Sample Management

Published on: November 30, 2022

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 17, 2026

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

Shotgun Proteomics Sample Processing Automated by an Open-Source Lab Robot

Shotgun Proteomics Sample Processing Automated by an Open-Source Lab Robot

Published on: October 28, 2021

Biobank for Translational Medicine: Standard Operating Procedures for Optimal Sample Management

Biobank for Translational Medicine: Standard Operating Procedures for Optimal Sample Management

Published on: November 30, 2022

Area of Science:

Scientific methodology
Research integrity
Open science

Background:

Reproducibility is fundamental to the scientific method.
Increasing research complexity and specialization pose challenges to experiment replication.
Clear and rigorous communication of scientific methods is essential for reproducibility.

Purpose of the Study:

To propose actionable steps for increasing scientific method transparency.
To enhance the reproducibility of research findings.
To promote open science principles within the scientific community.

Main Methods:

Introduction of a peer-review oath and an accompanying manifesto.
Development of guidelines for reviewers to apply open science principles.
Integration of these tools at the peer-review stage of scientific publishing.

Main Results:

The proposed oath and manifesto aim to minimize friction and bias for reviewers.
These tools are designed to ensure published research contains sufficient detail for replication.
Implementation at peer review can improve confidence in research reproducibility.

Conclusions:

Adopting the peer-review oath and manifesto can improve the quality and transparency of scientific publications.
Conscientious application of these principles by the scientific community will bolster research reproducibility.
Enhanced reproducibility offers strategic benefits to authors and institutions, increasing societal impact.