
doi: 10.3758/pbr.16.4.617
pmid: 19648445
If an initial experiment produces a statistically significant effect, what is the probability that this effect will be replicated in a follow-up experiment? I argue that this seemingly fundamental question can be interpreted in two very different ways and that its answer is, in practice, virtually unknowable under either interpretation. Although the data from an initial experiment can be used to estimate one type of replication probability, this estimate will rarely be precise enough to be of any use. The other type of replication probability is also unknowable, because it depends on unknown aspects of the research context. Thus, although it would be nice to know the probability of replicating a significant effect, researchers must accept the fact that they generally cannot determine this information, whichever type of replication probability they seek.
Psychology, Experimental, Data Collection, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Research, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Probability
Psychology, Experimental, Data Collection, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Research, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Probability
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 66 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
