The hierarchical Bayesian analysis of the working memory study was nearly complete, and I was preparing the preprint for public release. During a final review, I noticed that a few figures did not match the expected results. I decided to review the entire workflow and recreate the figures to verify the results.
I found that some analysis steps had not been documented as clearly as they should have been. During the analysis, I explored several alternative approaches, and a few code cells and comments no longer reflected the final workflow. To ensure everything was correct, I regenerated the main figures and carefully compared them with the final analysis.
This highlighted the essential role of careful verification in research. Exploring new ideas during an analysis is a natural part of scientific work, but every change should be tracked carefully. Keeping a clear record of the final analysis pipeline makes it easier to verify results and avoid mistakes before publication.
In future studies, I will maintain a more structured analysis workflow and document every important decision more carefully. I will also keep a clearer record of the final analysis pipeline and perform a complete review of the workflow before preparing a manuscript to ensure that every reported result is reproducible.