The “replication crisis” in the public eye: Germans’ awareness and perceptions of the (ir)reproducibility of scientific research

TLDR

Meta‑analytical attempts to reproduce empirical findings have failed, sparking a debate over a “replication crisis” that some see as eroding public trust while others view it as a means to strengthen confidence in science. The study aims to assess German public awareness and perceptions of the replication crisis by analyzing data from the Science Barometer survey. The authors performed a secondary analysis of nationally representative survey data from Germany’s Science Barometer. The analysis shows that most Germans are unaware of the replication crisis, view replication efforts as evidence of scientific quality control, and believe its reputational benefits outweigh concerns, though AfD supporters are more skeptical and distrustful of science.

Abstract

Several meta-analytical attempts to reproduce results of empirical research have failed in recent years, prompting scholars and news media to diagnose a “replication crisis” and voice concerns about science losing public credibility. Others, in contrast, hoped replication efforts could improve public confidence in science. Yet nationally representative evidence backing these concerns or hopes is scarce. We provide such evidence, conducting a secondary analysis of the German “Science Barometer” (“Wissenschaftsbarometer”) survey. We find that most Germans are not aware of the “replication crisis.” In addition, most interpret replication efforts as indicative of scientific quality control and science’s self-correcting nature. However, supporters of the populist right-wing party AfD tend to believe that the “crisis” shows one cannot trust science, perhaps using it as an argument to discredit science. But for the majority of Germans, hopes about reputational benefits of the “replication crisis” for science seem more justified than concerns about detrimental effects.