Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12857/140967
Title: PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Authors: Aarts, Alexander A.
Anderson, Joanna E.
Anderson, Christopher J.
Attridge, Peter R.
Attwood, Angela
Axt, Jordan
Babel, Molly
Bahník, Štěpán
Baranski, Erica
Barnett-Cowan, Michael
Bartmess, Elizabeth
Beer, Jennifer
Bell, Raoul
Bentley, Heather
Beyan, Leah
Binion, Grace
Borsboom, Denny
Bosch, Annick
Bosco, Frank A.
Bowman, Sara D.
Brandt, Mark J.
Braswell, Erin
Brohmer, Hilmar
Brown, Benjamin T.
Brown, Kristina
Brüning, Jovita
Calhoun-Sauls, Ann
Callahan, Shannon P.
Chagnon, Elizabeth
Chandler, Jesse
Chartier, Christopher R.
Cheung, Felix
Christopherson, Cody D.
Cillessen, Linda
Clay, Russ
Cleary, Hayley
Cloud, Mark D.
Conn, Michael
Cohoon, Johanna
Columbus, Simon
Cordes, Andreas
Costantini, Giulio
Alvarez, Leslie D.Cramblet
Cremata, Ed
Crusius, Jan
DeCoster, Jamie
DeGaetano, Michelle A.
Penna, Nicolás Delia
Den Bezemer, Bobby
Deserno, Marie K.
Devitt, Olivia
Dewitte, Laura
Dobolyi, David G.
Dodson, Geneva T.
Donnellan, M. Brent
Donohue, Ryan
Dore, Rebecca A.
Dorrough, Angela
Dreber, Anna
Dugas, Michelle
Dunn, Elizabeth W.
Easey, Kayleigh
Eboigbe, Sylvia
Eggleston, Casey
Embley, Jo
Epskamp, Sacha
Errington, Timothy M.
Estel, Vivien
Farach, Frank J.
Feather, Jenelle
Fedor, Anna
Fernández-Castilla, Belén
Fiedler, Susann
Field, James G.
Fitneva, Stanka A.
Flagan, Taru
Forest, Amanda L.
Forsell, Eskil
Foster, Joshua D.
Frank, Michael C.
Frazier, Rebecca S.
Fuchs, Heather
Gable, Philip
Galak, Jeff
Galliani, Elisa Maria 
Gampa, Anup
Garcia, Sara
Gazarian, Douglas
Gilbert, Elizabeth
Giner-Sorolla, Roger
Glöckner, Andreas
Goellner, Lars
Goh, Jin X.
Goldberg, Rebecca
Goodbourn, Patrick T.
Gordon-McKeon, Shauna
Gorges, Bryan
Gorges, Jessie
Goss, Justin
Graham, Jesse
Keywords Plus: REPLICABILITY;REPLICATION;PUBLICATION;INCENTIVES;PREVALENCE;TRUTH;POWER
Mesh headings: Behavioral Research;Psychology;Publishing;Research
Secondary Mesh headings: Confidence Intervals;Periodicals as Topic;Publication Bias;Reproducibility of Results;Research Design
Issue Date: 28-Aug-2015
Publisher: AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
Journal: Science (New York, N.Y.) 
Abstract: 
Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12857/140967
ISSN: 00368075
DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716
Appears in Collections:Articles

Show full item record

PubMed Central
Citations 50

613
checked on Mar 31, 2020

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

2,595
checked on Sep 6, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

3,035
checked on Oct 19, 2021

Page view(s) 1

22
checked on Oct 21, 2021

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.