Editors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science

By Harold Pashler, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2012

913 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, History and Philosophy of Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1a67f9a4624b4ea989e4ea9b14ea178a010017c0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In History and Philosophy of Science

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Statistical Rituals: The Replication Delusion and How We Got There (2018, background): “The replication crisis has led to heated debates on how much waste is produced, in what fields this occurs, and what exactly counts as a replication in the first place (e.g., Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012; Stroebe & Strack, 2014).”
Play It Again, Sam! An Analysis of Constructive Replication in the Organizational Sciences (2019, background): “These and other sources include explanations of the importance of replication (e.g., Anderson & Maxwell, 2016; Bettis, Helfat, & Shaver, 2016; Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012; Simons, 2014; Vazire, 2018) and calls for change to the review process (e.g., Nosek & Lakens, 2014).”
On doing better science: From thrill of discovery to policy implications (2017, background): “Consequences: Crises, lack of quality and impact Because of the above diseases, some branches of psychology, a key foundational discipline of leadership, are currently facing difficulties with respect to replicability (Open Science Collaboration, 2015; Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012).”
On the scientific superiority of conceptual replications for scientific progress (2016, background): “In terms of both published commentary (Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012) and public social media discussions on the “replication crisis,” those favoring a shift toward direct replication have received a great deal of attention.”
Facts Are More Important Than Novelty (2014, background): “Like Campbell and Stanley (1963) noted a half century ago about experimental design, replication is not a panacea (Makel et al., 2012; Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012).”
Influences on the Test–Retest Reliability of Functional Connectivity MRI and its Relationship with Behavioral Utility (2017, background): “For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com Begley and Ellis 2012; Pashler and Wagenmakers 2012; Open Science Collaboration 2015).”
Reflections on the replication corner: In praise of conceptual replications (2015, background): “A number of researchers have concluded that there is a replication crisis in the social sciences, raising new questions about the trustworthiness of our evidence base (e.g. Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012; Simons, 2014).”
Lookit (Part 1): A New Online Platform for Developmental Research (2017, background): “The motivation to bring studies online is bolstered by growing awareness of the importance of direct replication and reproducible results (Open Science Collaboration, 2015; Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012).”
The Latent Structure of Spatial Skills and Mathematics: A Replication of the Two-Factor Model (2017, background): “There is a general need for replication in psychological research, as highlighted by recent reports (e.g., Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012).”
The benefits of nature experience: Improved affect and cognition (2015, background): “Across he sciences, there is growing appreciation of the importance of eplication (Cumming, 2011; Miguel et al., 2014; Nosek, Spies, & otyl, 2012; Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012; Stanley & Spence, 014).”