Say where you sample: Increasing site selection transparency in urban ecology

Urban ecological studies have the potential to expand our understanding of socioecological systems beyond that an individual city or region. Cross-comparative empirical work and synthesis are imperative develop a general urban theory. This can be achieved only if replicable generalizable. Transparency in methods reporting facilitates generalizability replicability by documenting decisions scientists make during various steps research design; this is particularly true for sampling design selection because their impact on both internal external validity unintentionally introduce bias. Three interdependent aspects sample study (e.g., specific organisms, soils, water), specification (measurement variable interest), site (locations sampled). Of these, documentation selection—the where component design—is underrepresented ecology literature. Using stratified random 158 papers from 12 major journals, we investigated how researchers selected sites ecosystems evaluated whether were transparent. We extracted data these using 50-question, theory-based questionnaire multiple-reviewer approach. Our represented almost 45 years across 40 different countries. found more than 80% read not transparent methodology. do believe 70% read. Key weaknesses include incomplete descriptions populations frames, gradients, methods, property access. Low transparency methodology limits ecologists' ability assess studies' findings replicate published studies; it also existing studies. The challenges low relevant ecology, field standard protocols delineation still being developed. These limitations interfere with fields' build theory inform policy. conclude offering set recommendations increase transparency, replicability, generalizability.