1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility

By Monya Baker. Nature, 2016

3,514 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biophysics, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/57b101db87fb0b67fbe8b57f90b83f8e9efe81a6

How researchers see this paper

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

In Biophysics

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

An intercomparison of a large ensemble of statistical downscaling methods over Europe: Results from the VALUE perfect predictor cross‐validation experiment (2016, background): “For instance, a recent survey over 1,500 scientists recently reported by Baker (2016) revealed that the work published in different research fields (including Earth and Environment) was mostly not reproducible (over two thirds).”
The Scientific Method in the Science of Machine Learning (2019, background): “These ﬁelds face a reproducibility crisis (Ioannidis, 2005; Baker, 2016) and discourage negative results (Rosenthal, 1979; Brodeur et al., 2016; Schuemie et al., 2018).”
CONSORT Statement for Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatments: A 2017 Update and a CONSORT Extension for Nonpharmacologic Trial Abstracts. (2017, background): “Improving transparency is particularly important in the context of the replication crisis in science (37).”
The MIMIC Code Repository: enabling reproducibility in critical care research (2017, background): “Concerns about the reproducibility of results in science are becoming increasingly prominent in both scientific and mainstream literature.(1) Some commentators have gone so far as to call the current state a crisis, citing causes such as pressure to publish positive results, the cost of replicating ”
Influences on the Test–Retest Reliability of Functional Connectivity MRI and its Relationship with Behavioral Utility (2017, background): “Unfortunately, many scientists argue that biomedical research is in the midst of a sort of “crisis of reproducibility” (Baker 2016; cf. © The Author 2017.”
Inferential Statistics as Descriptive Statistics: There Is No Replication Crisis if We Don’t Expect Replication (2018, background): “It is also about perceived nonreplication of scientific results being interpreted as a sign of bad science (Baker 2016).”
Answers to 18 Questions About Open Science Practices (2018, neutral): “In response to concerns about a “reproducibility crisis” (Baker, 2016), the open science movement and its associated practices are being discussed fervently within scholarly circles (Antonakis, 2017; Bosco, Aguinis, Field, Pierce, & Dalton, 2016; Grand, Rogelberg, Banks, Landis, & Tonidandel, in…”
Reproducibility of computational workflows is automated using continuous analysis (2017, background): “In a recent survey, 90% of researchers acknowledged that there ‘is a reproducibility crisis’ 6 .”