Nonreplicable publications are cited more than replicable ones

Published papers that fail to replicate are cited more than those that replicate, even after the failure is published. We use publicly available data to show that published papers in top psychology, economics, and general interest journals that fail to replicate are cited more than those that replic...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:Science advances Ročník 7; číslo 21
Hlavní autori: Serra-Garcia, Marta, Gneezy, Uri
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: American Association for the Advancement of Science 21.05.2021
Predmet:
ISSN:2375-2548, 2375-2548
On-line prístup:Získať plný text
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Popis
Shrnutí:Published papers that fail to replicate are cited more than those that replicate, even after the failure is published. We use publicly available data to show that published papers in top psychology, economics, and general interest journals that fail to replicate are cited more than those that replicate. This difference in citation does not change after the publication of the failure to replicate. Only 12% of postreplication citations of nonreplicable findings acknowledge the replication failure. Existing evidence also shows that experts predict well which papers will be replicated. Given this prediction, why are nonreplicable papers accepted for publication in the first place? A possible answer is that the review team faces a trade-off. When the results are more “interesting,” they apply lower standards regarding their reproducibility.
Bibliografia:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
These authors contributed equally to this work.
ISSN:2375-2548
2375-2548
DOI:10.1126/sciadv.abd1705