Will reproducibility always be this hard?Ten years after Ioannidis alleged that most scientific findings are false, reproducibility – or lack thereof – has become a full-blown crisis in science. Flagship journals like Nature and Science have published hand-wringing editorials and revised their policies in the hopes of heightening standards of reproducibility. In the statistical and data sciences, the barriers towards reproducibility are far lower, given that our analysis can usually be digitally encoded (e.g., scripts, algorithms, data files, etc.). Failure to ensure the credibility of our contributions will erode “the extraordinary power of statistics,” both among our colleagues and in our collaborations with scientists of all fields. This morning’s JSM session on Reproducibility in Statistics and Data Science featured talks on recent efforts in pursuit of reproducibility. The slides of talks by the speakers and the discussant are posted below.

Note that some links point to a GitHub repo including slides as well as other useful resources for the talk and for adopting reproducible frameworks for your research and teaching. I’m also including Twitter handles for the speakers which is likely the most efficient way for getting in touch with them if you have any questions for them.

This session was organized by Ben Baumer and myself as part of our Project TIER fellowship. Many thanks to Amelia McNamara, who is also a Project TIER fellow, for chairing the session (and correctly pronouncing my name)!

PS: Don’t miss this gem of a repo for links to many many more JSM 2016 slides. Thanks Karl for putting it together!