Reliability and Sensitivity of Neuromuscular and Perceptual Fatigue Measures in Collegiate Men’s Basketball
Edwards, T., Spiteri, T., Piggott, B., Bonhotal, J., Haff, G. G., & Joyce, C.
10.1519/JSC.0000000000002517
The following reasons from the retraction watch database cite the following:
Error in Analyses
Error in Methods
Error in Results and/or Conclusions
If the authors, would’ve taken the advice of Sandve, the following rules would have been helpful in making sure that the article was not retracted:
Rule 1: For Every Result, Keep Track of How It Was Produced
Rule 5: Record All Intermediate Results, When Possible in Standardized Formats
It appears in the article that the sample size of the group was 12 Men’s basketball players, the researchers used 90% confidence intervals without adjusting for the limited sample size. The researchers did not describe any methods that were used statistically to determine the table outcomes.
Rule 4: Version Control All Custom Scripts and Rule 10: Provide Public Access to Scripts, Runs, and Results will be the rule that I’m most likely to follow. At this point between the advancement of technologies, like Github and Rstudio, when programming for a project we can easily add the availability to the public easily.
Rule 3: Archive the Exact Versions of All External Programs Used will be the hardest to follow when I tend to keep my local environment behind to maintain consistency and limited hurdles when making sure that things work to move forward. Package dependencies tend to be hard to keep up to date with versions.