↓ Skip to main content

Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science

Overview of attention for article published in Science, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#30 of 65,944)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
2857 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3721 Mendeley
citeulike
20 CiteULike
Title
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Published in
Science, August 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.aac4716
Pubmed ID
Abstract

Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,124 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3,721 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 55 1%
Germany 28 <1%
United Kingdom 24 <1%
Netherlands 15 <1%
France 12 <1%
Japan 8 <1%
Australia 8 <1%
Sweden 8 <1%
Spain 8 <1%
Other 61 2%
Unknown 3494 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 916 25%
Student > Master 564 15%
Student > Bachelor 497 13%
Researcher 492 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 244 7%
Other 732 20%
Unknown 276 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 1641 44%
Social Sciences 294 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 230 6%
Neuroscience 175 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 143 4%
Other 738 20%
Unknown 500 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4000. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2020.
All research outputs
#317
of 15,183,979 outputs
Outputs from Science
#30
of 65,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1
of 240,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#1
of 1,220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,183,979 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 65,944 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 49.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 240,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.