Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by
Crossref.
Wallach, Joshua D.
Boyack, Kevin W.
Ioannidis, John P. A.
and
Dirnagl, Ulrich
2018.
Reproducible research practices, transparency, and open access data in the biomedical literature, 2015–2017.
PLOS Biology,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 11,
p.
e2006930.
Hoeppner, Sven
2019.
A note on replication analysis.
International Review of Law and Economics,
Vol. 59,
Issue. ,
p.
98.
Kharabian Masouleh, Shahrzad
Eickhoff, Simon B
Hoffstaedter, Felix
and
Genon, Sarah
2019.
Empirical examination of the replicability of associations between brain structure and psychological variables.
eLife,
Vol. 8,
Issue. ,
Nelson, R. L.
2019.
How to find a meta-analysis you can trust.
Techniques in Coloproctology,
Vol. 23,
Issue. 9,
p.
919.
Hantula, Donald A.
2019.
Editorial: Replication and Reliability in Behavior Science and Behavior Analysis: A Call for a Conversation.
Perspectives on Behavior Science,
Vol. 42,
Issue. 1,
p.
1.
Mooney, Stephen J.
Hurvitz, Philip M.
Moudon, Anne Vernez
Zhou, Chuan
Dalmat, Ronit
and
Saelens, Brian E.
2020.
Residential neighborhood features associated with objectively measured walking near home: Revisiting walkability using the Automatic Context Measurement Tool (ACMT).
Health & Place,
Vol. 63,
Issue. ,
p.
102332.
Gallo, Jiri
and
Nieslanikova, Eva
2020.
Prevention of Prosthetic Joint Infection: From Traditional Approaches towards Quality Improvement and Data Mining.
Journal of Clinical Medicine,
Vol. 9,
Issue. 7,
p.
2190.
Kiel, Christina
Strunz, Tobias
Grassmann, Felix
and
Weber, Bernhard H. F.
2020.
Pleiotropic Locus 15q24.1 Reveals a Gender-Specific Association with Neovascular but Not Atrophic Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD).
Cells,
Vol. 9,
Issue. 10,
p.
2257.
Skorski, Sabrina
and
Hecksteden, Anne
2021.
Coping With the “Small Sample–Small Relevant Effects” Dilemma in Elite Sport Research.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 11,
p.
1559.
Bielekova, Bibiana
and
Brownlee, Shannon
2021.
The imperative to find the courage to redesign the biomedical research enterprise.
F1000Research,
Vol. 10,
Issue. ,
p.
641.
Braun, Tobias
Marks, Detlef
Thiel, Christian
and
Grüneberg, Christian
2021.
A generic outcome assessment of mobility capacity in neurorehabilitation: measurement properties of the de Morton Mobility Index.
BMC Neurology,
Vol. 21,
Issue. 1,
Chin, Jason M.
and
Zeiler, Kathryn
2021.
Replicability in Empirical Legal Research.
Annual Review of Law and Social Science,
Vol. 17,
Issue. 1,
p.
239.
Bouter, Lex M.
and
Riet, Gerben ter
2021.
Replication Research Series-Paper 2 : Empirical research must be replicated before its findings can be trusted.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,
Vol. 129,
Issue. ,
p.
188.
Wentzel, Kathryn R.
2021.
Open science reforms: Strengths, challenges, and future directions.
Educational Psychologist,
Vol. 56,
Issue. 2,
p.
161.
Carpenter, Thomas P.
and
Law, Keyne C.
2021.
Optimizing the scientific study of suicide with open and transparent research practices.
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior,
Vol. 51,
Issue. 1,
p.
36.
Davis, Mellar P.
2022.
In response to the study “a randomized trial of medical cannabis in patients with stage for cancers to assess feasibility, dose requirements, impact on pain and opioid use, safety, and overall patient’s satisfaction” by Dr. Zylla and colleagues.
Supportive Care in Cancer,
Vol. 30,
Issue. 6,
p.
4579.
Liu, Joshua
Kelly, Erin
and
Bielekova, Bibiana
2022.
Current Status and Future Opportunities in Modeling Clinical Characteristics of Multiple Sclerosis.
Frontiers in Neurology,
Vol. 13,
Issue. ,
Hecksteden, Anne
Kellner, Ralf
and
Donath, Lars
2022.
Dealing with small samples in football research.
Science and Medicine in Football,
Vol. 6,
Issue. 3,
p.
389.
Schwab, Andreas
Aguinis, Herman
Bamberger, Peter
Hodgkinson, Gerard P.
Shapiro, Debra L.
Starbuck, William H.
and
Tsui, Anne S.
2023.
How replication studies can improve doctoral student education.
Journal of Management Scientific Reports,
Vol. 1,
Issue. 1,
p.
18.
Hensel, Przemysław G.
2023.
How often are replication attempts questioned?.
Accountability in Research,
p.
1.
Target article
Making replication mainstream
Related commentaries (36)
A Bayesian decision-making framework for replication
A pragmatist philosophy of psychological science and its implications for replication
An argument for how (and why) to incentivise replication
Bayesian belief updating after a replication experiment
Conceptualizing and evaluating replication across domains of behavioral research
Constraints on generality statements are needed to define direct replication
Data replication matters to an underpowered study, but replicated hypothesis corroboration counts
Direct replication and clinical psychological science
Direct replications in the era of open sampling
Don't characterize replications as successes or failures
Enhancing research credibility when replication is not feasible
Holding replication studies to mainstream standards of evidence
How to make replications mainstream
If we accept that poor replication rates are mainstream
Introducing a replication-first rule for Ph.D. projects
Making prepublication independent replication mainstream
Making replication prestigious
Putting replication in its place
Replication is already mainstream: Lessons from small-N designs
Replications can cause distorted belief in scientific progress
Scientific progress is like doing a puzzle, not building a wall
Selecting target papers for replication
Strong scientific theorizing is needed to improve replicability in psychological science
The costs and benefits of replication studies
The importance of exact conceptual replications
The meaning of a claim is its reproducibility
The replicability revolution
Three strong moves to improve research and replications alike
Three ways to make replication mainstream
To make innovations such as replication mainstream, publish them in mainstream journals
Verifiability is a core principle of science
Verify original results through reanalysis before replicating
What have we learned? What can we learn?
What the replication reformation wrought
Why replication has more scientific value than original discovery
You are not your data
Author response
Improving social and behavioral science by making replication mainstream: A response to commentaries