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.
We analyze the light curve of the microlensing event OGLE-2003-BLG-175/MOA-2003-BLG-45 and show that it has two properties that, when combined with future high-resolution astrometry, could lead to a direct, accurate measurement of the lens mass. First, the light curve shows clear signs of distortion due to the Earth's accelerated motion, which yields a measurement of the projected Einstein radius (r) over tilde (E). Second, from precise astrometric measurements, we show that the blended light in the event is coincident with the microlensed source to within about 15 mas. This argues strongly that this blended light is the lens and hence opens the possibility of directly measuring the lens- source relative proper motion mu(rel) and so the mass M=(c(2)/4G)mu(rel)t(E)(r) over tilde (E), where t(E) is the measured Einstein timescale. While the light-curve-based measurement of (r) over tildeE is, by itself, severely degenerate, we show that this degeneracy can be completely resolved by measuring the direction of proper motion mu(rel)
Gilbert et al. conclude that evidence from the Open Science Collaboration’s Reproducibility Project: Psychology indicates high reproducibility, given the study methodology. Their very optimistic assessment is limited by statistical misconceptions and by causal inferences from selectively interpreted, correlational data. Using the Reproducibility Project: Psychology data, both optimistic and pessimistic conclusions about reproducibility are possible, and neither are yet warranted.