Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Reproducibility, closely related to replicability and repeatability, is a major principle underpinning the scientific method.For the findings of a study to be reproducible means that results obtained by an experiment or an observational study or in a statistical analysis of a data set should be achieved again with a high degree of reliability when the study is replicated.
The same paper examined the reproducibility rates and effect sizes by journal and discipline. Study replication rates were 23% for the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48% for Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, and 38% for Psychological Science. Studies in the field of cognitive psychology had a ...
However, repeat measurements are collected during a single experimental session, while replicate measurements are gathered across different experimental sessions. [2] Replication in statistics evaluates the consistency of experiment results across different trials to ensure external validity, while repetition measures precision and internal ...
Goodman, Fanelli and Ioannidis define method reproducibility as "the provision of enough detail about study procedures and data so the same procedures could, in theory or in actuality, be exactly repeated." [2] This acception is largely synonymous with replicability in a computational context or reproducibility in an experimental context. In ...
The Reproducibility Project is a series of crowdsourced collaborations aiming to reproduce published scientific studies, finding high rates of results which could not be replicated. It has resulted in two major initiatives focusing on the fields of psychology [ 1 ] and cancer biology. [ 2 ]
The history of scientific method considers changes in the methodology of scientific inquiry, not the history of science itself. The development of rules for scientific reasoning has not been straightforward; scientific method has been the subject of intense and recurring debate throughout the history of science, and eminent natural philosophers and scientists have argued for the primacy of ...
This allows anyone to decide whether a theory can be supported or refuted by data. However, the interpretation of experimental data may be also inconclusive or uncertain. Karl Popper introduced the concept that scientific knowledge had the property of falsifiability as published in The Logic of Scientific Discovery. [2]
The converse does not prove a theory; Bayesian inference simply makes a theory more likely, by weight of evidence. Since it is not possible to find all counter-examples to a theory, it is also possible to argue that no science is strictly empirical, but this is not the usual meaning of "quasi-empirical".