Replications in Psychology Research

TLDR

Recent controversies in psychology have highlighted the importance of replication in the field. The study aims to provide an overview of replications in psychological research since 1900. The authors analyzed the complete publication histories of the 100 psychology journals with the highest 5‑year impact factors. They found that only about 1.07 % of psychology articles were true replications, most of which were successful, but success dropped when authorship did not overlap, and the overall replication rate has risen over recent decades.

Abstract

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.