Why so many studies can’t be replicated

An analysis of thousands of social science studies found that half couldn't be replicated. What's behind this pattern, and can it be fixed?

How do we know what we know? That's where science comes in—it gives us a method for testing our ideas and getting trustworthy results. But some researchers have warned that many scientific studies can't be replicated.

To find out how deep the problem goes, the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency funded one of the largest analyses of social science, called the SCORE project. They checked the results of thousands of papers across economics, education, and psychology—and found that only half of them could be replicated.

Joining Host Ira Flatow to discuss the findings are Tim Errington, one of the leads on this project, and economist Abel Brodeur, who recently released the results of a separate replication study that found more encouraging results than SCORE did.

Guest:

Dr. Tim Errington is senior director of research at the Center For Open Science in Washington, D.C.

Dr. Abel Brodeur is a professor of economics at the University of Ottawa and founder of the Institute for Replication.

Transcripts for each episode are available within 1-3 days at sciencefriday.com.

Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.