If a systematic campaign of replication does not lead to the same results, then either the original research is flawed (as the replicators claim) or the replications are (as many of the original researchers on priming contend).
Each scenario was simulated for 15 years and replicated 10 times, with results averaged over the replications.
While 97% of the original studies had a statistically significant result, just 36% of the replications had the same outcome.
Concerns aside, that this process is happening is a good thing – the replications are open access, post-publication peer review is open to all, and the co-editors of the special issue have published all of the relevant email correspondence to try and shed light on the situation.
The results we present represent the average of the replications.
The replications are used to measure experimental error [31].
The replications are important for estimating experimental error.
Some are heralding the replications as a renaissance for the social sciences.
That means that the psychologists expected that about half of the replications would fail.
The replications of tumour shape, internal enhancement, and margin were treated as classification problems.
As a result, the salinity (ppt) somewhat varied among the replications of the same dilution rate.
