The 2018 COGR survey examined the range and accessibility of resources provided by research institutions to support rigor, reproducibility, and overall research quality. With responses from 34% of member institutions, the survey revealed that while a substantial proportion offer critical resources—such as grant development support (95%), computing assistance (80%), biostatistics support (78%), and library services (81%)—fewer provide protocol templates (59%), centralized resource repositories (36%), or specific training in reproducibility (45%). Incentives for reproducibility and transparency remain especially limited, implemented at only about 11% of institutions. The survey also found that a majority of institutions review research proposals for design quality and maintain data repositories, yet there is considerable variability in the comprehensiveness, organization, and visibility of available resources.
Challenges highlighted include the decentralized nature of resources, with many respondents needing to contact multiple offices and reporting difficulties in locating resources online. The document presents recommendations, notably those from the University of Southern California, which emphasize increasing transparency, institutional training, explicit evaluation of rigor in promotions, participation in reproducibility initiatives, and infrastructure development for authenticating research materials. Ultimately, the findings point to significant disparities in institutional support and call for coordinated strategies to centralize resources, enhance researcher awareness, and further embed rigor and reproducibility in research culture and practice.
