Three ways to make replication mainstream

By Rolf A. Zwaan, Alexander Etz, Richard E. Lucas, M. B. Donnellan. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2017

306 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract A scientific claim is a generalization based on a reported statistically significant effect. The reproducibility of that claim is its scientific meaning. Anything not explicitly mentioned in a scientific claim as a limitation of the claim's scope means that it implicitly generalizes over these unmentioned aspects. Hence, so-called “conceptual” replications that differ in these unmentioned aspects from the original study are legitimate, and necessary to test the generalization implied by the original study's claim.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, General Decision Sciences, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d09b2e97d40107525a50214ead0771a6839211e2

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

1. Daphne Bavelier
2. C. Shawn Green
3. Jason M. Chein
4. Richard E. Mayer
5. Lorenza S. Colzato
6. A. Diamond
7. Nora S. Newcombe
8. Danielle S. McNamara

In General Decision Sciences

1. Daphne Bavelier
2. Lorenza S. Colzato
3. Jason M. Chein
4. Bernhard Hommel
5. J. Karbach

In Statistics and Probability

1. Daphne Bavelier
2. Jason M. Chein
3. C. Shawn Green
4. Karlene K. Ball
5. Nora S. Newcombe
6. Danielle S. McNamara
7. Richard E. Mayer
8. Adam Gazzaley

Citations in the corpus

• Improving Methodological Standards in Behavioral Interventions for Cognitive Enhancement (2019, background): “There have been an increasing number of calls over the past few years for more replication in psychology (Open Science 2012; Pashler and Harris 2012; Zwaan et al. 2017).”