A Bayesian Perspective on the Reproducibility Project: Psychology

Alexander Etz and Joachim Vandekerckhove

PLOS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, issue 2, 1-12

Abstract: We revisit the results of the recent Reproducibility Project: Psychology by the Open Science Collaboration. We compute Bayes factors—a quantity that can be used to express comparative evidence for an hypothesis but also for the null hypothesis—for a large subset (N = 72) of the original papers and their corresponding replication attempts. In our computation, we take into account the likely scenario that publication bias had distorted the originally published results. Overall, 75% of studies gave qualitatively similar results in terms of the amount of evidence provided. However, the evidence was often weak (i.e., Bayes factor

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (19)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0149794 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 49794&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0149794

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149794

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().