Nav: Home

Increased scientific rigor will improve wildlife research and management

January 18, 2018

Wildlife management relies on rigorous science that produces reliable knowledge because it increases accurate understanding of the natural world and informs management decisions. A new Journal of Wildlife Management article evaluates the prevalence of scientific rigor in wildlife research and outlines the components of a rigorous scientific method.

The analysis of 24 issues of the Journal of Wildlife Management from August 2013 through July 2016 found that 43.9% of studies did not appear to test hypotheses, although reliable knowledge relies on explicit hypothesis testing. This may in part be due to a lack of common understanding of what rigorous science entails.

The authors describe how a rigorous scientific method includes 1) generating a research question from theory and prior observations, 2) developing hypotheses (i.e., plausible biological answers to the question), 3) formulating predictions (i.e., facts that must be true if the hypothesis is true), 4) designing and implementing research to collect data potentially consistent with predictions, 5) evaluating whether predictions are consistent with collected data, and 6) drawing inferences based on the evaluation.

"Reliable knowledge is challenging to produce and communicate, so our goal was to develop a cohesive reference for conducting rigorous science," said lead author Sarah Sells, of the University of Montana, Missoula. "Increasing awareness of how we can produce reliable knowledge through scientific research will ultimately lead to greater effectiveness of wildlife management and conservation."
-end-
Additional Information

Link to Study: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.21413/full

About Journal

The Journal of Wildlife Management publishes manuscripts containing information from original research that contributes to basic wildlife science. Suitable topics include investigations into the biology and ecology of wildlife and their habitats that has direct or indirect implications for wildlife management and conservation. This includes basic information on wildlife habitat use, reproduction, genetics, demographics, viability, predator-prey relationships, space-use, movements, behavior, and physiology; but within the context of contemporary management and conservation issues such that the knowledge may ultimately be useful to wildlife practitioners

Wiley

Related Predictions Articles:

Accuracy of physician and nurse predictions for survival, functional outcomes after an ICU admission
Physicians were more accurate in predicting the likelihood of death and less accurate in predicting cognitive abilities in six months for critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients; nurses' predictions were similar or less accurate, according to a study published by JAMA.
Penn study pinpoints accuracy of ICU doctors' and nurses' predictions of patient outcomes
A new study shows that ICU physicians are better at predicting whether patients will be alive in six months than they are at predicting patients' cognitive function in six months.
Dopamine neurons factor ambiguity into predictions enabling us to 'win big and win often'
In the struggle of life, evolution rewards animals that master their circumstances, especially when the environment changes.
How does the brain make perceptual predictions over time?
NYU neuroscientist David Heeger offers a new framework to explain how the brain makes predictions.
Scientists improve predictions of how temperature affects the survival of fish embryos
NOAA Fisheries Ecology Division and UC Santa Cruz researchers found the thermal tolerance of Chinook salmon embryos in the Sacramento River is much lower than expected from laboratory studies.
Snow data from satellites improves temperature predictions, UT researchers show
Researchers with The University of Texas at Austin have found that incorporating snow data collected from space into computer climate models can significantly improve seasonal temperature predictions.
Neurons do math to distinguish predictions from reality
Neir Eshel, a neuropsychiatry research pioneer who uncovered novel insights about how dopamine neurons are programmed to help us navigate the consequences of our choices, has been named the 2016 Grand Prize winner of the Science & SciLifeLab Prize for Young Scientists.
Quicker and twice as accurate predictions
With ever-increasing amounts of online information available, modelling and predicting individual preferences for certain products is becoming more and more important.
The Lancet: China's recent two-child policy unlikely to lead to short-term population boom, according to new predictions
China's recently introduced universal two-child policy is predicted to have a relatively small effect on population growth, with a likely peak of 1.45 billion in 2029, compared to 1.4 billion in 2023 if the one-child policy had continued, according to academics writing in The Lancet.
Global climate models do not easily downscale for regional predictions
One size does not always fit all, especially when it comes to global climate models, according to Penn State climate researchers.

Related Predictions Reading:

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Digital Manipulation
Technology has reshaped our lives in amazing ways. But at what cost? This hour, TED speakers reveal how what we see, read, believe — even how we vote — can be manipulated by the technology we use. Guests include journalist Carole Cadwalladr, consumer advocate Finn Myrstad, writer and marketing professor Scott Galloway, behavioral designer Nir Eyal, and computer graphics researcher Doug Roble.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#529 Do You Really Want to Find Out Who's Your Daddy?
At least some of you by now have probably spit into a tube and mailed it off to find out who your closest relatives are, where you might be from, and what terrible diseases might await you. But what exactly did you find out? And what did you give away? In this live panel at Awesome Con we bring in science writer Tina Saey to talk about all her DNA testing, and bioethicist Debra Mathews, to determine whether Tina should have done it at all. Related links: What FamilyTreeDNA sharing genetic data with police means for you Crime solvers embraced...