Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science

Alexander A. Aarts , Joanna E. Anderson , Christopher Anderson , Alexander A. Aarts , Joanna E. Anderson , Christopher Anderson , Peter Raymond Attridge , Angela S. Attwood , Jordan Axt , Molly Babel , Štěpán Bahník , Erica Baranski , Michael Barnett‐Cowan , Elizabeth Bartmess , Jennifer S. Beer , Raoul Bell , Heather Bentley , Leah Beyan , Grace Binion , Denny Borsboom , Annick Bosch , Frank A. Bosco , Sara Bowman , Mark J. Brandt , Erin L Braswell , Hilmar Brohmer , Benjamin T. Brown , Kristina A. Brown , Jovita Brüning , Ann Calhoun-Sauls , Shannon Callahan , Elizabeth Chagnon , Jesse Chandler , Christopher R. Chartier , Felix Cheung , Cody D. Christopherson , Linda Cillessen , Russ Clay , Hayley M. D. Cleary , Mark D. Cloud , Michael Conn , Johanna Cohoon , Simon Columbus , Andreas Cordes , Giulio Costantini , Leslie D. Cramblet Alvarez , Ed Cremata , Jan Crusius , Jamie DeCoster , Michelle A. DeGaetano , Nicolás Delia Penna , Bobby Den Bezemer , Marie K. Deserno , Olivia Devitt , Laura Dewitte , David G. Dobolyi , Geneva T. Dodson , M. Brent Donnellan , Ryan Donohue , Rebecca A. Dore , Angela Rachael Dorrough , Anna Dreber , Michelle Dugas , Elizabeth W. Dunn , Kayleigh Easey , Sylvia Eboigbe , Casey Eggleston , Jo Embley , Sacha Epskamp , Timothy M. Errington , Vivien Estel , Frank J. Farach , Jenelle Feather , Anna Fedor , Belén Fernández‐Castilla , Susann Fiedler , James G. Field , Stanka A. Fitneva , Taru Flagan , Amanda L. Forest , Eskil Forsell , Joshua Foster , Michael C. Frank , Rebecca S. Frazier , Heather M. Fuchs , Philip A. Gable , Jeff Galak , Elisa Maria Galliani , Anup Gampa , Sara García , Douglas Gazarian , Elizabeth Gilbert , Roger Giner‐Sorolla , Andreas Glöckner , Lars Goellner , Jin X. Goh , Rebecca Goldberg , Patrick T. Goodbourn , Shauna Gordon-McKeon , Bryan Gorges , Jessie Gorges , J. B. Dobieand J. R. Goss , Jesse Graham
2015 Science 8,410 citations

Abstract

Empirically analyzing empirical evidence One of the central goals in any scientific endeavor is to understand causality. Experiments that seek to demonstrate a cause/effect relation most often manipulate the postulated causal factor. Aarts et al. describe the replication of 100 experiments reported in papers published in 2008 in three high-ranking psychology journals. Assessing whether the replication and the original experiment yielded the same result according to several criteria, they find that about one-third to one-half of the original findings were also observed in the replication study. Science , this issue 10.1126/science.aac4716

Keywords

Replication (statistics)Confidence intervalReproducibilityPsychological scienceStatisticsPsychologyMeta-analysisPublication biasInterval (graph theory)Feature (linguistics)Clinical psychologyMathematicsSocial psychologyMedicine

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2015
Type
article
Volume
349
Issue
6251
Pages
aac4716-aac4716
Citations
8410
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

8410
OpenAlex

Cite This

Alexander A. Aarts, Joanna E. Anderson, Christopher Anderson et al. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science , 349 (6251) , aac4716-aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716

Identifiers

DOI
10.1126/science.aac4716