Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFarrar, Benjamin
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-11T13:23:55Z
dc.date.available2022-05-11T13:23:55Z
dc.date.submitted2022-09-30
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/337016
dc.description.abstractIn this thesis I explore the extent to which researchers of animal cognition should be concerned about the reliability of its scientific results and the presence of theoretical biases across research programmes. To do so I apply and develop arguments borne in human psychology’s “replication crisis” to animal cognition research and assess a range of secondary data analysis methods to detect bias across heterogeneous research programmes. After introducing these topics in Chapter 1, Chapter 2 makes the argument that areas of animal cognition research likely contain many findings that will struggle to replicate in direct replication studies. In Chapter 3, I combine two definitions of replication to outline the relationship between replication and theory testing, generalisability, representative sampling, and between-group comparisons in animal cognition. Chapter 4 then explores deeper issue in animal cognition research, examining how the academic systems that might select for research with low replicability might also select for theoretical bias across the research process. I use this argument to suggest that much of the vociferous methodological criticism in animal cognition research will be ineffective without considering how the academic incentive structure shapes animal cognition research. Chapter 5 then beings my attempt to develop methods to detect bias and critically and quantitatively synthesise evidence in animal cognition research. In Chapter 5, I led a team examining publication bias and the robustness of statistical inference in studies of animal physical cognition. Chapter 6 was a systematic review and a quantitative risk-of-bias assessment of the entire corvid social cognition literature. And in Chapter 7, I led a team assessing how researchers in animal cognition report and interpret non-significant statistical results, as well as the p-value distributions of non-significant results across a manually extracted dataset and an automatically extracted dataset from the animal cognition literature. Chapter 8 then reflects on the difficulties of synthesising evidence and detecting bias in animal cognition research. In Chapter 9, I present survey data of over 200 animal cognition researchers who I questioned on the topics of this thesis. Finally, Chapter 10 summarises the findings of this thesis, and discusses potential next steps for research in animal cognition.
dc.description.sponsorshipBGF was supported by the University of Cambridge BBSRC Doctoral Training Programme (BB/M011194/1)
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectAnimal cognition
dc.subjectReplication
dc.subjectBias
dc.subjectMeta-research
dc.subjectReproducibility
dc.subjectComparative cognition
dc.titleReplication, bias, and meta-research in animal cognition research
dc.typeThesis
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoral
dc.type.qualificationnameDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cambridge
dc.date.updated2022-05-06T06:41:42Z
dc.identifier.doi10.17863/CAM.84438
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.contributor.orcidFarrar, Benjamin [0000-0001-8912-6133]
rioxxterms.typeThesis
pubs.funder-project-idBBSRC (1943419)
pubs.funder-project-idBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (1943419)
cam.supervisorClayton, Nicola
cam.supervisorOstojic, Ljerka
cam.depositDate2022-05-06
pubs.licence-identifierapollo-deposit-licence-2-1
pubs.licence-display-nameApollo Repository Deposit Licence Agreement


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)