Abstract
Increasing evidence indicates that many published findings in psychology may be overestimated or even false. An often-heard response to this “replication crisis” is to replicate more: replication studies should weed out false positives over time and increase robustness of psychological science. However, replications take time and money – resources that are often scarce. In this chapter, I propose an efficient alternative strategy: a four-step robustness check that first focuses on verifying reported numbers through reanalysis before replicating studies in a new sample.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Avoiding questionable research practices in applied psychology |
| Editors | William O'Donohue, Akihiko Masuda, Scott Lilienfeld |
| Publisher | Springer |
| Chapter | 17 |
| Pages | 379-400 |
| ISBN (Print) | 978-3-031-04967-5 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2022 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing and improving robustness of psychological research findings in four steps'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver