@unpublished{AsendorpfConnerDeFruytetal.2013,
  author    = {Asendorpf, Jens B. and Conner, Mark and De Fruyt, Filip and De Houwer, Jan and Denissen, Jaap J. A. and Fiedler, Klaus and Fiedler, Susann and Funder, David C. and Kliegl, Reinhold and Nosek, Brian A. and Perugini, Marco and Roberts, Brent W. and Schmitt, Manfred and Van Aken, Marcel A. G. and Weber, Hannelore and Wicherts, Jelte M.},
  title     = {Replication is more than hitting the lottery twice},
  series = {European journal of personality},
  volume    = {27},
  journal   = {European journal of personality},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0890-2070},
  pages     = {138 -- 144},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {The main goal of our target article was to provide concrete recommendations for improving the replicability of research findings. Most of the comments focus on this point. In addition, a few comments were concerned with the distinction between replicability and generalizability and the role of theory in replication. We address all comments within the conceptual structure of the target article and hope to convince readers that replication in psychological science amounts to much more than hitting the lottery twice.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{AsendorpfConnerDeFruytetal.2013,
  author    = {Asendorpf, Jens B. and Conner, Mark and De Fruyt, Filip and De Houwer, Jan and Denissen, Jaap J. A. and Fiedler, Klaus and Fiedler, Susann and Funder, David C. and Kliegl, Reinhold and Nosek, Brian A. and Perugini, Marco and Roberts, Brent W. and Schmitt, Manfred and vanAken, Marcel A. G. and Weber, Hannelore and Wicherts, Jelte M.},
  title     = {Recommendations for increasing replicability in psychology},
  series = {European journal of personality},
  volume    = {27},
  journal   = {European journal of personality},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0890-2070},
  doi       = {10.1002/per.1919},
  pages     = {108 -- 119},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Replicability of findings is at the heart of any empirical science. The aim of this article is to move the current replicability debate in psychology towards concrete recommendations for improvement. We focus on research practices but also offer guidelines for reviewers, editors, journal management, teachers, granting institutions, and university promotion committees, highlighting some of the emerging and existing practical solutions that can facilitate implementation of these recommendations. The challenges for improving replicability in psychological science are systemic. Improvement can occur only if changes are made at many levels of practice, evaluation, and reward.},
  language  = {en}
}