Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science

Open Science Collaboration, Angela Attwood, Kayleigh Easey, Ian Penton-Voak

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

5279 Citations (Scopus)


Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)aac4716
Issue number6251
Publication statusPublished - 28 Aug 2015

Bibliographical note

Copyright © 2015, American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Structured keywords

  • Brain and Behaviour
  • Cognitive Science
  • Social Cognition
  • Tobacco and Alcohol


Dive into the research topics of 'Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this