A Systematic Review Of Context Bias In Invasion Biology

Abstract

The language that scientists use to frame biological invasions may reveal inherent bias—including how data are interpreted. A frequent critique of invasion biology is the use of value-laden language that may indicate context bias. Here we use a systematic study of language and interpretation in papers drawn from invasion biology to evaluate whether there is a link between the framing of papers and the interpretation of results. We also examine any trends in context bias in biological invasion research. We examined 651 peer-reviewed invasive species competition studies and implemented a rigorous systematic review to examine bias in the presentation and interpretation of native and invasive competition in invasion biology. We predicted that bias in the presentation of invasive species is increasing, as suggested by several authors, and that bias against invasive species would result in misinterpreting their competitive dominance in correlational observational studies compared to causative experimental studies. We indeed found evidence of bias in the presentation and interpretation of invasive species research; authors often introduced research with invasive species in a negative context and study results were interpreted against invasive species more in correlational studies. However, we also found a distinct decrease in those biases since the mid-2000s. Given that there have been several waves of criticism from scientists both inside and outside invasion biology, our evidence suggests that the subdiscipline has somewhat self-corrected apparent biases.

Publication Date

8-1-2017

Publication Title

PLoS ONE

Volume

12

Issue

8

Document Type

Article

Personal Identifier

scopus

DOI Link

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182502

Socpus ID

85027683869 (Scopus)

Source API URL

https://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85027683869

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS