The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Statistical Analyses and Reproducible Research
Abstract
It is important, if not essential, to integrate the computations and code used in data analyses, methodological descriptions, simulations, and so on with the documents that describe and rely on them. This integration allows readers to both verify and adapt the claims in the documents. Authors can easily reproduce the results in the future, and they can present the document's contents in a different medium, for example, with interactive controls. This article describes a software framework for both authoring and distributing these integrated, dynamic documents that contain text, code, data, and any auxiliary content needed to recreate the computations. The documents are dynamic in that the contents—including figures, tables, and so on—can be recalculated each time a view of the document is generated. Our model treats a dynamic document as a master or “source” document from which one can generate different views in the form of traditional, derived documents for different audiences.We introduce the concept of a compendium as a container for one or more dynamic documents and the different elements needed when processing them, such as code and data. The compendium serves as a means for distributing, managing, and updating the collection.The step from disseminating analyses via a compendium to reproducible research is a small one. By reproducible research, we mean research papers with accompanying software tools that allow the reader to directly reproduce the results and employ the computational methods that are presented in the research paper. Some of the issues involved in paradigms for the production, distribution, and use of such reproducible research are discussed.
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
Cited by
phyloseq: An R Package for Reproducible Interactive Analysis and Graphics of Microbiome Census Data
McMurdie, P. J., & Holmes, S. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0061217 · Cited by 21,322
Bioconductor: open software development for computational biology and bioinformatics
Gentleman, R. C., Carey, V. J., Bates, D. M., Bolstad, B., Dettling, M., Dudoit, S., Ellis, B., Gautier, L., Ge, Y., Gentry, J., et al. (2004) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2004-5-10-r80 · Cited by 12,172
Self-citationRStudio: A Platform‐Independent IDE for R and Sweave
Racine, J. S. (2012) · Journal of Applied Econometrics · doi:10.1002/jae.1278 · Cited by 559
An empirical analysis of journal policy effectiveness for computational reproducibility
Stodden, V., Seiler, J., & Ma, Z. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1708290115 · Cited by 369
Marwick, B. (2017) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-015-9272-9 · Cited by 179
Metadata
- Authors
- Gentleman, R., & Temple Lang, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-23
- ISSN
- 1061-8600 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2715
- OpenAlex
- W2104279568
- Cited by
- 348
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.13
- 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: Statistical Analyses and Reproducible Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1198/106186007x178663
- The paper
- Gentleman, R., & Temple Lang, D. (2007). Statistical Analyses and Reproducible Research. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1198/106186007x178663
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.