- Nov 9, 2012
- Reaction score
- PA, USA
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/08/27/trouble-in-science-massive-effort-to-reproduce-100-experimental-results-succeeds-only-36-times/Maverick researchers have long argued that much of what gets published in elite scientific journals is fundamentally squishy — that the results tell a great story but can’t be reproduced when the experiments are run a second time.
[No, science’s reproducibility problem is not limited to psychology]
Now a volunteer army of fact-checkers has published a new report that affirms that the skepticism was warranted. Over the course of four years, 270 researchers attempted to reproduce the results of 100 experiments that had been published in three prestigious psychology journals.
It was awfully hard. They ultimately concluded that they’d succeeded just 39 times.
The failure rate surprised even the leaders of the project, who had guessed that perhaps half the results wouldn’t be reproduced.
The new paper, titled "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science," was published Thursday in the journal Science. The sweeping effort was led by the Center for Open Science, a nonprofit based in Charlottesville. The center's director, Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychology professor, said the review focused on the field of psychology because the leaders of the center are themselves psychologists.
I found this article to be interesting, particularly since this focused on the field of psychology which I recently had an argument with PtA about whether psychology was really science or not.
Keep it up researchers! Because, you know, science.