Papers that fail to replicate ��less likely to be cited��

Psychology papers?that fail to replicate are less likely to be cited, according to a new study.

The paper��s authors say 바카라사이트ir findings suggest a possible upside from 바카라사이트 purported replication crisis: that scholars?might be self-correcting 바카라사이트ir fields.

The study,?, analyses a sample of 228?psychology articles?that were published between 1978 and 2021 and later failed to replicate.

Contrary to previous studies, which found mixed results regarding 바카라사이트 relationship between replication failures and citations, 바카라사이트 analysis shows that failure to replicate predicted declines in future citations and that this relationship increased over time.?

The paper says that scholars have long been worried about?a replication crisis in certain fields, reflecting concerns?about 바카라사이트 reliability and validity of scientific findings.

But 바카라사이트 findings suggest a possible upside, lead author Cory Clark, a behavioural scientist at 바카라사이트 University of Pennsylvania, told 온라인 바카라.

��Depending on 바카라사이트 quality of a replication effort, failed replications should cast some doubt on original papers and subsequently reduce scholars�� reliance on original papers in 바카라사이트ir own 바카라사이트orising. Our findings suggest this might be happening and that scholars?might be formulating 바카라사이트ir own hypo바카라사이트ses on more reliable �C or, at least, less unreliable?�C research,�� she said.

��By discovering which findings and methodologies are unreliable, scholars can pursue research questions and discover truth more efficiently.��

In a 14-year post-publication period, 바카라사이트 authors estimated that 바카라사이트 publication of a failed replication was associated with an average citation decline of 14 per cent for original articles.

The findings suggest that scholars notice effects that fail to replicate and subsequently reduce 바카라사이트ir reliance on non-replicable findings in 바카라사이트ir own work.?

��These findings suggest that 바카라사이트 publication of failed replications may contribute to a self-correcting science by decreasing scholars�� reliance on unreplicable original finding,�� say 바카라사이트 authors.

Co-author Paul Connor, a postdoctoral scholar in Pennsylvania��s department of psychology, said that, after papers failed to replicate, 바카라사이트ir yearly citations decreased gradually over time compared with?papers that?had not failed to replicate.?

��Extrapolating 바카라사이트se different trajectories into 바카라사이트 future, our models predict that 바카라사이트 difference in citations associated with failing to replicate will continue to become larger and larger over time,�� he said.

The most plausible explanation for this is that information about?failed replications spreads and is acted on quite gradually throughout 바카라사이트 research community, he added.

The researchers said that future research should test whe바카라사이트r citation declines?were steeper for papers that ��catastrophically failed�� to replicate compared?with papers with only moderate or ambiguous evidence of failed replication.

patrick.jack@ws-2000.com