The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The priority of prediction in ecological understanding
Abstract
The objective of science is to understand the natural world; we argue that prediction is the only way to demonstrate scientific understanding, implying that prediction should be a fundamental aspect of all scientific disciplines. Reproducibility is an essential requirement of good science and arises from the ability to develop models that make accurate predictions on new data. Ecology, however, with a few exceptions, has abandoned prediction as a central focus and faces its own crisis of reproducibility. Models are where ecological understanding is stored and they are the source of all predictions – no prediction is possible without a model of the world. Models can be improved in three ways: model variables, functional relationships among dependent and independent variables, and in parameter estimates. Ecologists rarely test to assess whether new models have made advances by identifying new and important variables, elucidating functional relationships, or improving parameter estimates. Without these tests it is difficult to know if we understand more today than we did yesterday. A new commitment to prediction in ecology would lead to, among other things, more mature (i.e. quantitative) hypotheses, prioritization of modeling techniques that are more appropriate for prediction (e.g. using continuous independent variables rather than categorical) and, ultimately, advancement towards a more general understanding of the natural world. Synthesis Ecology, with a few exceptions, has abandoned prediction and therefore the ability to demonstrate understanding. Here we address how this has inhibited progress in ecology and explore how a renewed focus on prediction would benefit ecologists. The lack of emphasis on prediction has resulted in a discipline that tests qualitative, imprecise hypotheses with little concern for whether the results are generalizable beyond where and when the data were collected. A renewed commitment to prediction would allow ecologists to address critical questions about the generalizability of our results and the progress we are making towards understanding the natural world.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Elements of Statistical Learning
Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7 · Cited by 25,970
Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference
Pearl, J. (2009) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803161 · Cited by 11,653
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Open Science Collaboration (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aac4716 · Cited by 8,515
A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection
Arlot, S., & Celisse, A. (2010) · Statistics Surveys · doi:10.1214/09-ss054 · Cited by 3,522
Structural Equation Modeling and Natural Systems
Grace, J. B. (2006) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511617799 · Cited by 2,432
Causal inference in statistics: An overview
Pearl, J. (2009) · Statistics Surveys · doi:10.1214/09-ss057 · Cited by 2,336 · cited 1×
“The literature on causal modelling is deep (Grace 2006, Pearl 2009a, b) and well beyond the scope of this article; however, linking mechanistic understanding to accurate predictions is an important future challenge facing ecologists (McGill and Nekola 2010).”
BackgroundWHAT IS THE OBSERVED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SPECIES RICHNESS AND PRODUCTIVITY?
Mittelbach, G. G., Steiner, C. F., Scheiner, S. M., Gross, K. L., Reynolds, H. L., Waide, R. B., Willig, M. R., Dodson, S. I., & Gough, L. (2001) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2381:witorb]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 1,650
The Minimum Description Length Principle
Grünwald, P. D. (2007) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4643.001.0001 · Cited by 1,644
Whittaker, R. J. (2010) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/08-0968.1 · Cited by 223
Cited by
Norberg, A., Abrego, N., Blanchet, F. G., Adler, F. R., Anderson, B. J., Anttila, J., Araújo, M. B., Dallas, T., Dunson, D., Elith, J., et al. (2019) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1002/ecm.1370 · Cited by 573
A practical guide to selecting models for exploration, inference, and prediction in ecology
Tredennick, A. T., Hooker, G., Ellner, S. P., & Adler, P. B. (2021) · Ecology · doi:10.1002/ecy.3336 · Cited by 474
Northrup, J. M., Vander Wal, E., Bonar, M., Fieberg, J., Laforge, M. P., Leclerc, M., Prokopenko, C. M., & Gerber, B. D. (2022) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1002/eap.2470 · Cited by 227
“Alternately, predictions out of the study system could form the basis for hypothesis tests (e.g., Houlahan et al. 2017).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Houlahan, J. E., McKinney, S. T., Anderson, T. M., & McGill, B. J.
- Venue
- Oikos
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-10-13
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-7
- ISSN
- 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0706
- OpenAlex
- W2510796315
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 138.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The priority of prediction in ecological understanding. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/oik.03726
- The paper
- Houlahan, J. E., McKinney, S. T., Anderson, T. M., & McGill, B. J. (2017). The priority of prediction in ecological understanding. Oikos. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.03726
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.