Replication crisis = trust crisis? The effect of successful vs failed replications on laypeople's trust in researchers and research.

In methodological and practical debates about replications in science, it is (often implicitly) assumed that replications will affect public trust in science. In this preregistered experiment ( = 484), we varied (a) whether a replication attempt was successful or not and (b) whether the replication was authored by the same, or another lab. Results showed that ratings of study credibility (e.g. evidence strength, η = .15) and researcher trustworthiness (e.g. expertise, η = .15) were rated higher upon learning of replication success, and lower in case of replication failure. The replication's author did not make a meaningful difference. Prior beliefs acted as covariate for ratings of credibility, but not trustworthiness, while epistemic beliefs regarding the certainty of knowledge were a covariate to both. Hence, laypeople seem to notice that successfully replicated results entail higher epistemic significance, while possibly not taking into account that replications should be conducted by other labs.