ReviewCommunications psychology2023
The replication crisis has led to positive structural, procedural, and community changes.
Review in Communications psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.
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
49 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple Suggested Care Alternatives and Decision-Making of Primary Care Physicians: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- How contemporary academic structures constrain scientific creativity and hold back early-career researchers.Nature human behaviour · 2026Review
- Should Qualitative Researchers in Health and Medicine be Concerned About Replication?The patient · 2026Article
- The Uptake of Preregistration, and Its Impact on the Proportion of Supported Hypotheses, in Sports Science.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Maternal sensitivity supports infant sleep: evidence from two longitudinal prospective cohorts on maternal childhood maltreatment, maternal sensitivity, and infant sleep.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- How Does the Lack of Diversity in Psychological Science Research Affect Undergraduate Students?Teaching of psychology (Columbia, Mo.) · 2026Article
- Response to authors' reply: persistent concerns regarding Nyquist et al. from 15 July 2024.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
- Accuracy in parameter estimation and simulation approaches for sample-size planning accounting for item effects.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Ideological bias in the production of research findings.Science advances · 2026Article
- Use as directed? A comparison of software tools intended to check rigor and transparency of published work.PloS one · 2026Article
- Quo Vadis translational neuroscience?Translational neuroscience · 2026Review
- The Bayesian audit: evaluating the proportionality of scientific claims to evidence - a case study on social priming and walking speed.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Can I trust this paper?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- International perspectives on gaps and solutions for integrating research evidence into classroom practices.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Research methodology education in Europe: a multi-country, cross-disciplinary survey of current practices and perspectives.Research integrity and peer review · 2025Article
- Editorial commitment to trust and integrity in science: implications for pain and anesthesiology research.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2025Article
- Multimodal predictors of disability progression and processing speed decline in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The struggle to make transparency mainstream: initial evidence for a slow uptake of open science practices in PhD theses.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Editorial commitment to trust and integrity in science: implications for pain and anaesthesiology research.Anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Editorial commitment to trust and integrity in science: Implications for pain and anesthesiology research.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The emergence of large-scale replication projects yielding successful rates substantially lower than expected caused the behavioural, cognitive, and social sciences to experience a so-called 'replication crisis'. In this Perspective, we reframe this 'crisis' through the lens of a credibility revolution, focusing on positive structural, procedural and community-driven changes. Second, we outline a path to expand ongoing advances and improvements. The credibility revolution has been an impetus to several substantive changes which will have a positive, long-term impact on our research environment.
Identifiers
What 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.