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 growth of metascience and the recognition of a scientific replication crisis have bolstered the paper's credibility, and led to calls for methodological reforms in scientific research. [8] [9] In commentaries and technical responses, statisticians Goodman and Greenland identified several weaknesses in Ioannidis' model.
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.
In the article published in The Conversation titled, "We need to talk about the bad science being funded", Gandevia highlights the replication crisis in modern science. Citing a statistic from the magazine Nature which finds some, 90% of 1576 researchers surveyed believe in a replication crisis. Gandevia stresses that ‘a high rate of ...
The book examines the replication crisis in social sciences and some of its underlying causes, such as p-hacking, and suggests remedies for "how both individuals and institutions can do a better job of resisting" exaggerated pop psychology.
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 ...