One of the pathways by which the scientific community confirms the validity of a new scientific discovery is by repeating the research that produced it. When a scientific effort fails to independently confirm the computations or results of a previous study, some fear that it may be a symptom of a lack of rigor in science, while others argue that such an observed inconsistency can be an important precursor to new discovery.
Concerns about reproducibility and replicability have been expressed in both scientific and popular media. As these concerns came to light, Congress requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conduct a study to assess the extent of issues related to reproducibility and replicability and to offer recommendations for improving rigor and transparency in scientific research.
Reproducibility and Replicability in Science defines reproducibility and replicability and examines the factors that may lead to non-reproducibility and non-replicability in research. Unlike the typical expectation of reproducibility between two computations, expectations about replicability are more nuanced, and in some cases a lack of replicability can aid the process of scientific discovery. This report provides recommendations to researchers, academic institutions, journals, and funders on steps they can take to improve reproducibility and replicability in science.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25303.
Chapters | skim | |
---|---|---|
Front Matter | i-xxii | |
Executive Summary | 1-4 | |
Summary | 5-20 | |
1 Introduction | 21-26 | |
2 Scientific Methods and Knowledge | 27-38 | |
3 Understanding Reproducibility and Replicability | 39-54 | |
4 Reproducibility | 55-70 | |
5 Replicability | 71-104 | |
6 Improving Reproducibility and Replicability | 105-142 | |
7 Confidence in Science | 143-162 | |
References | 163-188 | |
Appendix A: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff | 189-198 | |
Appendix B: Agendas of Open Committee Meetings | 199-208 | |
Appendix C: Recommendations Grouped by Stakeholder | 209-220 | |
Appendix D: Using Bayes Analysis for Hypothesis Testing | 221-230 | |
Appendix E: Conducting Replicable Surveys of Scientific Communities | 231-234 |
The Chapter Skim search tool presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter. You may select key terms to highlight them within pages of each chapter.
The National Academies Press (NAP) has partnered with Copyright Clearance Center's Marketplace service to offer you a variety of options for reusing NAP content. Through Marketplace, you may request permission to reprint NAP content in another publication, course pack, secure website, or other media. Marketplace allows you to instantly obtain permission, pay related fees, and print a license directly from the NAP website. The complete terms and conditions of your reuse license can be found in the license agreement that will be made available to you during the online order process. To request permission through Marketplace you are required to create an account by filling out a simple online form. The following list describes license reuses offered by the NAP through Marketplace:
Click here to obtain permission for the above reuses. If you have questions or comments concerning the Marketplace service, please contact:
Marketplace Support
International +1.978.646.2600
US Toll Free +1.855.239.3415
E-mail: [email protected]
marketplace.copyright.com
To request permission to distribute a PDF, please contact our Customer Service Department at [email protected].