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 (Mr = .197, SD = .257) were half the magnitude of original effects (Mr = .403, SD = .188), representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had significant results (p < .05). Thirty-six percent of replications had 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 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.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Journal | Science |
Volume | 349 |
Issue number | 6251 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 28 Aug 2015 |
Keywords
- empirical analysis
- error analysis
- innovation
- meta-analysis
- psychology
- research method
- research work
- Article
- confidence interval
- correlational study
- effect size
- prediction
- priority journal
- publishing
- reproducibility
- sampling
- selection bias
- social psychology
- statistical analysis
- statistical significance