Gold Standard Science

President Trump issued Executive Order 14303, “Restoring Gold Standard Science,” on May 23, 2025, to ensure that federally funded research is transparent, rigorous, and impactful and that federal decision-making is informed by the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available.

Gold Standard Science represents a commitment to the highest standards of scientific integrity, which are also reflected in the Department of Justice’s Scientific Integrity Policy and Evaluation Policy.

Gold Standard Science is defined by nine core tenets that are introduced in EO 14303 and further described in a guidance memorandum from the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). The Department of Justice and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) fully support the tenets of Gold Standard Science, which align with enduring commitments to conduct rigorous and relevant science that follows professional practices, ethical behavior, and the principles of honesty and objectivity in all scientific matters.

All applicants for and recipients of NIJ funding should understand the nine tenets of Gold Standard Science and how these tenets apply to the development, conduct, and communication of NIJ-funded scientific activities. Applicants for NIJ funding should include within their application a clear statement of commitment to comply with the principles and tenets of Gold Standard Science.

The Nine Tenets of Gold Standard Science 

Gold Standard Science means that scientific inquiry is conducted in a manner that is: 

1. Reproducible
2. Transparent
3. Communicative of error and uncertainty
4. Collaborative and interdisciplinary
5. Skeptical of its findings and assumptions
6. Structured for falsifiability of hypotheses
7. Subject to unbiased peer review
8. Accepting of negative results as positive outcomes
9. Without conflicts of interest

Tenet 1: Reproducible

• Reproducibility in science is the ability of independent researchers to test a hypothesis through multiple methods and consistently achieve results that confirm or refute it, ensuring findings are generalizable and robust across different approaches.
• Replicability is the ability to perform the same experiment or study using the same methods and conditions to achieve the same result.
• Both reproducibility and replicability are essential pillars of the scientific method. Replicability ensures the integrity and precision of specific experiments while reproducibility validates broader scientific claims.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Conduct disciplined scientific methods and experimental designs that include, as appropriate:
  • Clear, standardized, and justifiable protocols
  • Comprehensive documentation of methods, materials, data, and analytical procedures
  • Robust statistical methods
  • Adequate sample sizes supported by power analyses or statistical justification
  • Validated methodologies
  • Appropriate controls
• Reasonably ensure the accuracy of scientific information when engaged in scientific activities.
• When evaluating the causal impact of a program or policy, use methods that, to the greatest extent possible, isolate the impact of that program or policy from other influences.
• Pre-specify evaluation designs and methods to allow the greatest transparency and accountability within legal, ethical, national security, law enforcement, or other constraints on disclosing information.

Tenet 2: Transparent

• Transparency in science entails the open, accessible, and comprehensive sharing of all components of the research process — methodologies, data, analytical tools, and findings — to enable stringent scrutiny, validation, and reuse by the scientific community and the public.
• Transparency builds trust, fosters accountability, and promotes collaboration while reducing errors and bias. It complements reproducibility by ensuring that the materials and processes needed to replicate studies are accessible and clearly reported.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Adhere to NIJ’s Data Archiving requirements.
• Promote openness and transparency, as appropriate, while ensuring full compliance with the limits on disclosure of classified, law enforcement-sensitive (unclassified but sensitive), and statutorily protected information and maintaining consistency with applicable law and policy regarding the disclosure of privileged or confidential information and the attorney-client relationship.
• Report all evaluation results pertaining to the effectiveness or efficiency of programs and policies — whether favorable, unfavorable, or neutral — with exceptions for sensitive information (e.g., privacy, national security, law enforcement). 

Tenet 3: Communicative of error and uncertainty

• Communicating error and uncertainty in science entails the clear, precise, and accurate disclosure of limitations, variability, and potential sources of error or limitations in measurements or research findings, enabling other scientists to critically assess, replicate, and extend the work.
• Communication is essential for advancing scientific discovery as it upholds the integrity of new knowledge, fosters scrupulous inquiry, and supports collaborative innovation by providing a trustworthy foundation for future research.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Quantify statistical uncertainties in research, document and report potential sources of error, clearly articulate assumptions and methodological limitations, and disclose potential biases. Ensure that evaluation findings are accompanied by clear information about limitations on how or how broadly results should be applied.
• Ensure that the scientific principles and methods used are valid and reliable, the bases for all scientific and technical claims are clear and transparent, and the limitations of any findings or conclusions are fully explained.
• Ensure that evaluation reports include clear information about the extent to which conclusions about cause and effect are well-founded (internal validity) and can be generalized to other populations, settings, or circumstances (external validity).

Tenet 4: Collaborative and interdisciplinary

• Collaborative and interdisciplinary science refers to the strategic integration of a wide range of expertise, methodologies, and perspectives across disciplines and sectors to address complex scientific challenges and catalyze transformative discoveries.
• This approach is vital for generating new knowledge, as it fosters synergy, leverages complementary skills, and promotes the synthesis of ideas to raise new questions and tackle multifaceted problems that transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Prioritize collaborative and interdisciplinary approaches in scientific research to accelerate discovery and innovation. 
• When possible and appropriate, use open communication, shared resources, inclusive frameworks, interoperable data-sharing platforms, cross-disciplinary training programs, and shared terminology.
• Foster partnerships across agencies, disciplines, institutions, and sectors.

Tenet 5: Skeptical of its findings and assumptions

• Maintaining constructive skepticism of findings and assumptions in science refers to the critical and open-minded evaluation of research findings, methodologies, and underlying assumptions to ensure their validity, robustness, and reliability.
• This approach is essential for generating reliable new knowledge as it encourages scientists to challenge conclusions, explore alternative hypotheses, and identify potential biases or errors, thereby strengthening the scientific process.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Employ robust research validation methods — such as peer and merit review, replication studies, sensitivity analyses, and uncertainty assessments — while cultivating an open mindset that embraces scrutiny, iterative refinement, and intellectual humility.

Tenet 6: Structured for falsifiability of hypotheses

• Structuring science for falsifiability of hypotheses entails designing research studies and experiments to enable hypotheses to be carefully tested and potentially disproven through empirical evidence. 
• This approach is essential for generating new knowledge, as it anchors scientific claims in testable, refutable predictions — promoting rigor and preventing the perpetuation of unverified assumptions. 

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Formulate precise, testable hypotheses; design experiments with measurable outcomes; and employ rigorous methodologies — such as controlled experiments, randomized trials, or appropriate statistical tests — to systematically challenge predictions.
• When evaluating the causal impact of a program or policy, use methods that, to the greatest extent possible, isolate the impact of that program or policy from other influences.
• Pre-specify evaluation designs and methods to allow the greatest transparency and accountability within legal, ethical, national security, law enforcement, or other constraints on disclosing information.

Tenet 7: Subject to unbiased peer review

• Subjecting science to unbiased peer review refers to the impartial and independent evaluation, by qualified experts, of both research proposals and manuscripts that report results of federally supported research, to ensure validity, quality, and credibility prior to funding, publication, or dissemination.
• This process is critical for generating trustworthy new knowledge that minimizes bias, ensures methodological rigor, and upholds scientific standards through objective scrutiny.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• NIJ’s use of peer reviewers: 
  • Prioritizes the selection of effective and unbiased peer reviewers who are qualified, competent, and independent experts.
  • Provides transparent, well-defined peer review criteria.
  • Uses robust mechanisms to minimize conflicts of interest.

Tenet 8: Accepting of negative results as positive outcomes

• Accepting negative results as positive outcomes in science refers to recognizing and valuing — as meaningful contributions to knowledge generation — null or unexpected findings that fail to support a hypothesis. 
• This approach is essential for advancing pioneering science as it counters publication bias, encourages comprehensive reporting, and provides valuable insights into ineffective approaches, thereby guiding future research directions and avoiding redundant efforts.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Embrace negative results.
• Transparently document and share null findings using accepted methodologies, clear reporting formats, and accessible platforms, such as open-access journals or data repositories (see Data Archiving).
• Report all evaluation results — whether favorable, unfavorable, or neutral — with exceptions for sensitive information (e.g., privacy, national security, law enforcement).

Tenet 9: Without conflicts of interest

• Conducting science without conflicts of interest refers to ensuring that research is designed, executed, reviewed, and reported free from financial, personal, or institutional influences that could bias outcomes or undermine objectivity.
• This approach is important for generating trustworthy and credible new knowledge as it upholds scientific integrity, fosters public confidence, and ensures that results reflect evidence rather than external agendas.

Guidance for applicants and recipients of NIJ funding

• Disclose all affiliations, funding sources, and relationships relevant to the science conducted.
• Strive for objectivity in the planning and conduct of evaluations and the interpretation and dissemination of evaluation findings, avoiding conflicts of interest, bias, and other partiality.

Ensure that evaluators operate with an appropriate level of independence from programmatic, regulatory, policymaking, and stakeholder influences.