|
The replication crisis (or replicability crisis) refers to a methodological crisis in science, in which scientists have found that the results of many scientific experiments are difficult or impossible to replicate on subsequent investigation, either by independent researchers or by the original researchers themselves. Since the reproducibility of experiments is an essential part of the scientific method, this has potentially grave consequences for many fields of science in which significant theories are grounded on experimental work which has now been found to be resistant to replication. The replication crisis has been particularly widely discussed in the field of psychology (and in particular, social psychology) and in medicine, where a number of efforts have been made to re-investigate classic results, and to attempt to determine both the validity of the results, and, if invalid, the reasons for the failure of replication. Whether similar replicability crises affect other disciplines is not clear, as other disciplines have been less proactive in investigation. == In Psychology == Replication failures are not unique to psychology and are found in all fields of science. However, several factors have combined to put psychology at the center of controversy. Much of the focus has been on the area of social psychology, although other areas of psychology such as clinical psychology have also been implicated. Firstly, questionable research practices (QRPs) have been identified as common in the field.〔 Such practices, while not intentionally fraudulent, involve capitalizing on the gray area of acceptable scientific practices or exploiting flexibility in data collection, analysis, and reporting, often in an effort to obtain a desired outcome. Examples of QRPs include selective reporting or partial publication of data (reporting only some of the study conditions or collected dependent measures in a publication), optional stopping (choosing when to stop data collection based, often based on statistical significance of tests), p-value rounding (rounding p-values down to .05 to suggest statistical significance), file drawer effect (nonpublication of data), post-hoc storytelling (framing exploratory analyses as confirmatory analyses), manipulation of outliers (either removing outliers or leaving outliers in a dataset to cause a statistical test to be significant), and falsifying data. A survey of over 2,000 psychologists indicated that nearly all respondents admitted to using at least one QPR.〔 False positive conclusions, often resulting from the pressure to publish or the author's own confirmation bias, are an inherent hazard in the field, requiring a certain degree of skepticism on the part of readers. Secondly, psychology and social psychology in particular, has found itself at the center of several scandals involving outright fraudulent research, most notably the admitted data fabrication by Diederik Stapel〔("Fraud Scandal Fuels Debate Over Practices of Social Psychology: Even legitimate researchers cut corners, some admit" )〕 as well as allegations against others. However, most scholars acknowledge that fraud is, perhaps, the lesser contribution to replication crises. Third, several effects in psychological science have been found to be difficult to replicate even before the current replication crisis. For example the scientific journal ''Judgment and Decision Making'' has published several studies over the years that fail to provide support for the unconscious thought theory. Replications appear particularly difficult when research trials are pre-registered and conducted by research groups not highly invested in the theory under questioning. These three elements together have resulted in renewed attention for replication supported by Kahneman.〔"A New Etiquette for Replication". http://www.scribd.com/doc/225285909/Kahneman-Commentary〕 Scrutiny of many effects have shown that several core beliefs are hard to replicate. A recent special edition of the journal Social Psychology focused on replication studies and a number of previously held beliefs were found to be difficult to replicate.〔()〕 A 2012 special edition of the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science also focused on issues ranging from publication bias to null-aversion that contribute to the replication crises in psychology〔()〕 In 2015, the first open empirical study of reproducibility in Psychology was published, called the Reproducibility Project. Researchers from around the world collaborated to replicate 100 empirical studies from three top Psychology journals. Fewer than half of the attempted replications were successful at producing statistically significant results in the expected directions, though most of the attempted replications did produce trends in the expected directions. Scholar James Coyne has recently written that many research trials and meta-analyses are compromised by poor quality and conflicts of interest that involve both authors and professional advocacy organizations, resulting in many false positives regarding the effectiveness of certain types of psychotherapy.〔()〕 The replication crisis does not mean that psychology is unscientific.〔http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/07/replication_controversy_in_psychology_bullying_file_drawer_effect_blog_posts.single.html〕〔http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/psychology-is-starting-to-deal-with-its-replication-problem/〕〔http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/science-isnt-broken/〕 Rather this process is a healthy if sometimes acrimonious part of the scientific process in which old ideas or those that cannot withstand careful scrutiny are pruned,〔("Psychology's replication drive: it's not about you" )〕 although this pruning process is not always effective. The consequence is that some areas of psychology once considered solid, such as social priming, have come under increased scrutiny due to failed replications.〔("Power of Suggestion" )〕 The British Independent newspaper wrote that the results of the reproducibility project show that much of the published research is just "psycho-babble". Nobel laureate and professor emiritus in psychology Daniel Kahneman argued that the original authors should be involved in the replication effort because the published methods are often too vague.〔http://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/jun/10/physics-envy-do-hard-sciences-hold-the-solution-to-the-replication-crisis-in-psychology〕 Some others scientists, like Dr. Andrew Wilson disagree and argue that the methods should be written down in detail. An investigation of replication rates in psychology in 2012 indicated higher success rates of replication in replication studies when there was author overlap with the original authors of a study (91.7% successful replication rates in studies with author overlap compared to 64.6% success replication rates without author overlap). 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Replication crisis」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|