Cited by 48Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsAcademic Publishing and Open AccessPsychology Research and Bibliometrics

The best time to argue about what a replication means? Before you do it

Nosek, Brian A., Errington, Timothy M.·2020·Nature

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/d41586-020-02142-6

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Registered Reports are perceived as particularly useful for replication research because the first stage peer review ensures expert feedback for effective administration of the study.

    “RRs are perceived as particularly useful for replication research because the first stage peer review ensures expert feedback for effective administration of the study.”
  • Precommitment to the appropriateness of a replication design may reduce motivated reasoning to accept or reject replications based on the findings.

    “Also, precommitment to the appropriateness of a replication design may reduce motivated reasoning to accept or reject replications based on the findings 31 .”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nosek, B. A., & Errington, T. M.
Affiliations
Center for Open Science (US)
Corresponding author
  • Nosek, Brian A.
  • Errington, Timothy M.
Venue
Nature
Published
2020-07-21
Volume
583
Issue
7817
Pages
518-520
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W3043866520
Cited by
47
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
Keywords
replication study, scientific controversy, research reproducibility
MeSH terms
Research, Research Design, Reproducibility of Results, Bias, Research Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review