Psychology Is in Crisis Over Whether It’s in Crisis
The psychology establishment is fighting back against an attack on its reliability. But it might be letting emotion get in the way.
Send us a link
The psychology establishment is fighting back against an attack on its reliability. But it might be letting emotion get in the way.
Compared with psychology, the replication rate "is rather good," researchers say
Reanalysis of last year's enormous replication study argues that there is no need to be so pessimistic.
Apparently creationist research prompts soul searching over process of editing and peer review.
Observational study from 1994 to 2014
Universities need to expand international engagement to remain competitive, according to a report by Digital Science.
Female researchers now account for 37 per cent of first authors in medicine’s top journals, says US study
A peer-to-peer website aims to disrupt the author-services industry.
To engage the public in your work, whilst also solving that all-important research funding problem?
Recently, some have begun to explore the utilization of the crowd for various purposes in medical research, including fundraising as well as crowdsourcing for intellectual analyses and insights.
A report on international academic collaboration across the UK research base and on the implications of EU and global collaboration for universities, research assessment and the economy.
Researchers on social media ask at what point replication efforts go from useful to wasteful.
Researchers gathered at Sapienza University of Rome last week to discuss the cuts in Italy's research budget.
Fewer than half of academies have policies in place to boost gender equality in membership.
We revisit the results of the recent Reproducibility Project: Psychology by the Open Science Collaboration. We compute Bayes factors—a quantity that can be used to express comparative evidence for an hypothesis but also for the null hypothesis—for a large subset ( N = 72) of the original papers and their corresponding replication attempts. In our computation, we take into account the likely scenario that publication bias had distorted the originally published results. Overall, 75% of studies gave qualitatively similar results in terms of the amount of evidence provided. However, the evidence was often weak (i.e., Bayes factor < 10). The majority of the studies (64%) did not provide strong evidence for either the null or the alternative hypothesis in either the original or the replication, and no replication attempts provided strong evidence in favor of the null. In all cases where the original paper provided strong evidence but the replication did not (15%), the sample size in the replication was smaller than the original. Where the replication provided strong evidence but the original did not (10%), the replication sample size was larger. We conclude that the apparent failure of the Reproducibility Project to replicate many target effects can be adequately explained by overestimation of effect sizes (or overestimation of evidence against the null hypothesis) due to small sample sizes and publication bias in the psychological literature. We further conclude that traditional sample sizes are insufficient and that a more widespread adoption of Bayesian methods is desirable.
The NIH will convene a workshop this summer to review the ethical policies and procedures surrounding work on monkeys, baboons, and related animals.
The NSF announced its intention to hand out small grants later this year to dozens of institutions to test novel ways of broadening participation in science and engineering.
Children’s ages, peer environment quality, and recent funding affect decisions to move to new institutions, a new study suggests
Only one-third of trials at US medical centres are reported within two years of completion.
Science International has developed an international accord on the values of open data in the emerging scientific culture of big data. Endorsements are welcome until 1 May 2016.
Technological change is accelerating today at an unprecedented speed and could create a world we can barely begin to imagine.
Three years after the OSTP directive, policies to make data and publications resulting from federally funded research publicly accessible are becoming the norm.
On how scientific publishers are struggling to maintain their stranglehold over scientists.
What they fund and how they distribute their funds.
This research investigates the relationship between open science and public engagement.
Recommendations from the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.