Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science

Open Science Collaboration

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    5281 Citations (Scopus)
    188 Downloads (Pure)


    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
    Article numberaac4716
    Issue number6251
    Publication statusPublished - 28 Aug 2015

    Bibliographical note

    Please note this paper should be cited with the group author Open Science Collaboration. This is a collaboration of 270 authors (including Coventry University author Gavin Sullivan) who are all listed at the end of the paper.
    This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by the permission of the AAAS for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Science on 28 August 2015:
    Vol. 349 no. 6251, DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716 .


    • reproducibility
    • psychological research
    • replication success


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

    Cite this