Open Science Practices To Support Addiction Research

Being able to replicate the empirical observations reported by a colleague is a central premise of how scientific discoveries are expected to be disseminated. This ideal has been baked into the expectations of scientific processes for centuries and separates credible findings from incredible observations. The motto of the Royal Society, “Nullius in verba” or “On the word of no one,” exemplifies this ideal by specifying that demonstrating a finding is more important than claiming a finding. That demonstration can of course entail replication, but it also assumes transparently reporting the entirety of the evidence- the data and the precise methods by which the questions were established and analyzed. Our credibility as scientists requires that we acknowledge the incentives that drive our behavior and the biases that cloud our judgement. Transparency into the complete process of science is a necessary condition for obtaining and preserving that credibility. This transparency does not guarantee that perfectly rigorous methods will follow, but it does provide a more direct incentive for this level of rigor and it does allow for an accurate assessment of rigor to take place. This transparency is new to most scientists and we owe it to the community to reward it whenever we see it.