Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Known and Unknown Biases : A Framework for Contextualising and Identifying Bias in Animal Behaviour Research

Winder, Lucy A. ; Brignall, Emilie ; Dawson Pell, Francesca S.E. ; Germain, Marion ; Halliwell, Chay ; Hibberd, James A. ; Morland, Fay ; Nord, Andreas LU orcid ; Sutherland, Mark and Thompson, Jamie E. , et al. (2025) In Ethology 131(12). p.269-276
Abstract

Biases in animal behaviour research are inevitable consequences of our societal and cultural standpoint. To remove our biases, the first stage is to identify them. We call on individual researchers to adopt a more active approach to addressing bias within their research. We propose that biases exist within a matrix defined by the general acceptance of a bias's existence and the understanding of the impact this bias has on research outputs. Borrowing from a conceptual framework previously applied to the study of biodiversity, our matrix consists of four categories: “known knowns” are biases we are aware exist and are empirically tested; “known unknowns” are biases we know of but have limits to being mitigated against; “unknown knowns”... (More)

Biases in animal behaviour research are inevitable consequences of our societal and cultural standpoint. To remove our biases, the first stage is to identify them. We call on individual researchers to adopt a more active approach to addressing bias within their research. We propose that biases exist within a matrix defined by the general acceptance of a bias's existence and the understanding of the impact this bias has on research outputs. Borrowing from a conceptual framework previously applied to the study of biodiversity, our matrix consists of four categories: “known knowns” are biases we are aware exist and are empirically tested; “known unknowns” are biases we know of but have limits to being mitigated against; “unknown knowns” are biases which we know exist but are overlooked; and “unknown unknowns” are biases we are unaware exist. Contextualising biases in this way, we believe, will lead to greater investment by individual researchers to locate and mitigate biases in their own research. To facilitate this process, we provide a set of self-reflective questions designed to help researchers critically evaluate the assumptions, limitations, and generalisability of their research. By acknowledging and addressing biases within this framework, we move toward a more robust and trustworthy scientific process.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and , et al. (More)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and (Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
implicit bias, research integrity, scientific method
in
Ethology
volume
131
issue
12
pages
269 - 276
publisher
Wiley-Blackwell
external identifiers
  • scopus:105015188211
ISSN
0179-1613
DOI
10.1111/eth.70019
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
0ceb83ed-8d37-4359-ba67-e0648a39037e
date added to LUP
2025-11-14 12:10:14
date last changed
2025-12-19 16:18:41
@article{0ceb83ed-8d37-4359-ba67-e0648a39037e,
  abstract     = {{<p>Biases in animal behaviour research are inevitable consequences of our societal and cultural standpoint. To remove our biases, the first stage is to identify them. We call on individual researchers to adopt a more active approach to addressing bias within their research. We propose that biases exist within a matrix defined by the general acceptance of a bias's existence and the understanding of the impact this bias has on research outputs. Borrowing from a conceptual framework previously applied to the study of biodiversity, our matrix consists of four categories: “known knowns” are biases we are aware exist and are empirically tested; “known unknowns” are biases we know of but have limits to being mitigated against; “unknown knowns” are biases which we know exist but are overlooked; and “unknown unknowns” are biases we are unaware exist. Contextualising biases in this way, we believe, will lead to greater investment by individual researchers to locate and mitigate biases in their own research. To facilitate this process, we provide a set of self-reflective questions designed to help researchers critically evaluate the assumptions, limitations, and generalisability of their research. By acknowledging and addressing biases within this framework, we move toward a more robust and trustworthy scientific process.</p>}},
  author       = {{Winder, Lucy A. and Brignall, Emilie and Dawson Pell, Francesca S.E. and Germain, Marion and Halliwell, Chay and Hibberd, James A. and Morland, Fay and Nord, Andreas and Sutherland, Mark and Thompson, Jamie E. and Hemmings, Nicola}},
  issn         = {{0179-1613}},
  keywords     = {{implicit bias; research integrity; scientific method}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{12}},
  pages        = {{269--276}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley-Blackwell}},
  series       = {{Ethology}},
  title        = {{Known and Unknown Biases : A Framework for Contextualising and Identifying Bias in Animal Behaviour Research}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eth.70019}},
  doi          = {{10.1111/eth.70019}},
  volume       = {{131}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}