Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • COMMENT

The best time to argue about what a replication means? Before you do it

To avoid stalemates and provide lessons, replicators and original researchers must reach agreement on a study design and set out expectations ahead of time.
  1. Brian A. Nosek

    1. Brian A. Nosek is co-founder and executive director of the Center for Open Science, Charlottesville, Virginia; and professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

  2. Timothy M. Errington

    1. Timothy M. Errington is director of research at the Center for Open Science, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

Cartoon of a spot-the-difference game showing two lab scenes that are similar but with obvious differences

Illustration by David Parkins

The two of us have spent years coordinating replications of published studies. The most consistent outcomes are confusion and disagreement, particularly when outcomes seem to contradict original findings.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Nature 583, 518-520 (2020)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02142-6

References

  1. Errington, T. M. et al. eLife 3, e04333 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fung, J. J. et al. eLife 4, e08997 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Shan, X., Fung, J. J. & Kosaka, A. eLife 6, e25306 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gibson, C. E., Losee, J. & Vitiello, C. Soc. Psychol. 45, 194–198 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Moon, A. & Roeder, S. S. Soc. Psychol. 45, 199–201 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nosek, B. A. & Errington, T. M. PLoS Biol. 18, e3000691 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chambers, C. Nature 573, 187–189 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nosek, B. A. & Lakens, D. Soc. Psychol. 45, 137–141 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Calin-Jageman, R. J. & Caldwell, T. L. Soc. Psychol. 45, 239–245 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ebersole, C. R., Axt, J. R. & Nosek, B. A. PLoS Biol. 14, e1002460 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kahneman, D. Am. Psychol. 58, 723–730 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Matzke, D. et al. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 144, e1–e15 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ellemers, N., Fiske, S. T., Abele, A. E., Koch, A. & Yzerbyt, V. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 7561–7567 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Subjects

Latest on:

Nature Careers

Jobs

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing

Search

Advanced search

Quick links