Duke University
University of Connecticut.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012 Nov;7(6):537-42. doi: 10.1177/1745691612460688.
Recent controversies in psychology have spurred conversations about the nature and quality of psychological research. One topic receiving substantial attention is the role of replication in psychological science. Using the complete publication history of the 100 psychology journals with the highest 5-year impact factors, the current article provides an overview of replications in psychological research since 1900. This investigation revealed that roughly 1.6% of all psychology publications used the term replication in text. A more thorough analysis of 500 randomly selected articles revealed that only 68% of articles using the term replication were actual replications, resulting in an overall replication rate of 1.07%. Contrary to previous findings in other fields, this study found that the majority of replications in psychology journals reported similar findings to their original studies (i.e., they were successful replications). However, replications were significantly less likely to be successful when there was no overlap in authorship between the original and replicating articles. Moreover, despite numerous systemic biases, the rate at which replications are being published has increased in recent decades.
近年来,心理学领域的争议引发了人们对心理学研究的本质和质量的讨论。其中一个备受关注的话题是复制在心理学科学中的作用。本文利用影响因子最高的 100 种心理学期刊的完整出版历史,概述了自 1900 年以来心理学研究中的复制情况。调查显示,大约 1.6%的心理学出版物在正文中使用了“复制”一词。对随机选择的 500 篇文章进行更深入的分析后发现,只有 68%使用“复制”一词的文章是真正的复制,因此整体复制率为 1.07%。与其他领域的先前发现相反,本研究发现,心理学期刊中的大多数复制研究与原始研究得出了相似的结论(即它们是成功的复制)。然而,当原始研究和复制研究的作者没有重叠时,复制成功的可能性显著降低。此外,尽管存在许多系统性偏差,但近年来复制研究的发表率有所提高。