ArticleScience (New York, N.Y.)2016
Comment on "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science".
Article in Science (New York, N.Y.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
70 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Predicting risk and outcomes for frail older adults: an umbrella review of frailty screening tools.JBI database of systematic reviews and implementation reports · 2017Pooled it
- The Effect of a Brief, Web-Based Animated Video for Improving Comprehension and Implementation Feasibility for Reducing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: A Three-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Minimal intervention delivered by 2-1-1 information and referral specialists promotes smoke-free homes among 2-1-1 callers: a Texas generalisation trial.Tobacco control · 2016Trial
- Why researchers cut corners: motivations, pressures, and personality in questionable research practices.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Recruitment Strategies Bias Sampling and Shape Replicability.Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2026Article
- Adolescents' Pornography Exposure, Sexually Dominant Behavior, and Partnered Sexual Satisfaction: Replication in a U.S. Probability Sample.Archives of sexual behavior · 2026Article
- Meta-regression to explain shrinkage and heterogeneity in large-scale replication projects.PloS one · 2025Article
- Assessment of Replicability and Efforts to Refine an Operant Conditioning Procedure for Larval Zebrafish.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- High replicability of newly discovered social-behavioural findings is achievable.Nature human behaviour · 2024Article
- Agential realism as an alternative philosophy of science perspective for quantitative psychology.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Epistemic Functions of Replicability in Experimental Sciences: Defending the Orthodox View.Foundations of science · 2024Article
- Eleven years of student replication projects provide evidence on the correlates of replicability in psychology.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Survey of open science practices and attitudes in the social sciences.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Toward Open and Reproducible Epidemiology.American journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Proposal of a Selection Protocol for Replication of Studies in Sports and Exercise Science.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Article
- NBBt-test: a versatile method for differential analysis of multiple types of RNA-seq data.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Examining the generalizability of research findings from archival data.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Improving the reproducibility of findings by updating research methodology.Quality & quantity · 2022Article
10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A paper from the Open Science Collaboration (Research Articles, 28 August 2015, aac4716) attempting to replicate 100 published studies suggests that the reproducibility of psychological science is surprisingly low. We show that this article contains three statistical errors and provides no support for such a conclusion. Indeed, the data are consistent with the opposite conclusion, namely, that the reproducibility of psychological science is quite high.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26941311What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.