Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Document Type
- Article (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- Bayesian inference (1)
- conomics (1)
- demography (1)
- dispersal (1)
- dynamic models (1)
- dynamic range models (1)
- establishment (1)
- global change (1)
- niche models (1)
- open science (1)
- political science (1)
- replication (1)
- reproduction (1)
- research transparency (1)
- species distribution models (1)
Institute
The spatial distribution of a species is determined by dynamic processes such as reproduction, mortality and dispersal. Conventional static species distribution models (SDMs) do not incorporate these processes explicitly. This limits their applicability, particularly for non-equilibrium situations such as invasions or climate change. In this paper we show how dynamic SDMs can be formulated and fitted to data within a Bayesian framework. Our focus is on discrete state-space Markov process models which provide a flexible framework to account for stochasticity in key demographic processes, including dispersal, growth and competition. We show how to construct likelihood functions for such models (both discrete and continuous time versions) and how these can be combined with suitable observation models to conduct Bayesian parameter inference using computational techniques such as Markov chain Monte Carlo. We illustrate the current state-of-the-art with three contrasting examples using both simulated and empirical data. The use of simulated data allows the robustness of the methods to be tested with respect to deficiencies in both data and model. These examples show how mechanistic understanding of the processes that determine distribution and abundance can be combined with different sources of information at a range of spatial and temporal scales. Application of such techniques will enable more reliable inference and projections, e.g. under future climate change scenarios than is possible with purely correlative approaches. Conversely, confronting such process-oriented niche models with abundance and distribution data will test current understanding and may ultimately feedback to improve underlying ecological theory.
This study pushes our understanding of research reliability by reproducing and replicating claims from 110 papers in leading economic and political science journals. The analysis involves computational reproducibility checks and robustness assessments. It reveals several patterns. First, we uncover a high rate of fully computationally reproducible results (over 85%). Second, excluding minor issues like missing packages or broken pathways, we uncover coding errors for about 25% of studies, with some studies containing multiple errors. Third, we test the robustness of the results to 5,511 re-analyses. We find a robustness reproducibility of about 70%. Robustness reproducibility rates are relatively higher for re-analyses that introduce new data and lower for re-analyses that change the sample or the definition of the dependent variable. Fourth, 52% of re-analysis effect size estimates are smaller than the original published estimates and the average statistical significance of a re-analysis is 77% of the original. Lastly, we rely on six teams of researchers working independently to answer eight additional research questions on the determinants of robustness reproducibility. Most teams find a negative relationship between replicators' experience and reproducibility, while finding no relationship between reproducibility and the provision of intermediate or even raw data combined with the necessary cleaning codes.