Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The replication crisis [a] is an ongoing methodological crisis in which the results of many scientific studies are difficult or impossible to reproduce. Because the reproducibility of empirical results is an essential part of the scientific method , [ 2 ] such failures undermine the credibility of theories building on them and potentially call ...
The project has brought attention to the replication crisis, and has contributed to shifts in scientific culture and publishing practices to address it. [3] The project was led by the Center for Open Science and its co-founder, Brian Nosek, who started the project in November 2011. [4]
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 replication crisis (or credibility crisis) is a methodological crisis in science that researchers began to acknowledge around the 2010s. The controversy revolves around the lack of reproducibility of many scientific findings, including those in psychology (e.g., among 100 studies, less than 50% of the findings were replicated).
The "replication crisis" is compounded by a finding, published in a study summarized in 2021 by historian of science Naomi Oreskes, that nonreplicable studies are cited oftener than replicable ones: in other words, that bad science seems to get more attention than good science. If a substantial proportion of science is unreplicable, it will not ...
Example of direct replication and conceptual replication. There are two main types of replication in statistics. First, there is a type called “exact replication” (also called "direct replication"), which involves repeating the study as closely as possible to the original to see whether the original results can be precisely reproduced. [3]
There are many philosophical and historical theories as to how scientific consensus changes over time. Because the history of scientific change is extremely complicated, and because there is a tendency to project "winners" and "losers" onto the past in relation to the current scientific consensus, it is very difficult to come up with accurate and rigorous models for scientific change. [17]
At the start of his experiment he named the primary culture "phase one". Phase two is defined as the period when cells are proliferating; Hayflick called this the time of "luxuriant growth". After months of doubling the cells eventually reach phase three, a phenomenon he named "senescence", where cell replication rate slows before halting ...