Title

Replicate to Validate: The Importance of Replication in Science

Poster Number

9

Lead Author Major

Psychology

Format

Poster Presentation

Faculty Mentor Name

Carolynn Kohn

Faculty Mentor Department

Psychology

Abstract/Artist Statement

There is increasing pressure to publish unique scientific findings in academia. However, funding sources usually do not support replication research; because of this, many scholarly journals do not publish pure replication findings (Koocher & Keith-Speigel, 2008). Unfortunately, this diminishes researchers’ incentive to repeat the work of other scholars. Nevertheless, replication is a vital component to the scientific process because “no single study could answer all the relevant questions, but conducting a range of studies, each asking a slightly different question, both checks the results of previous studies and extends those studies in new directions” (Kennedy, 2005, p. 9). Several problems arise when independent researchers do not conduct replications. One such problem is known as the file-drawer effect. This occurs when consumers of scientific literature only learn of a single significant finding and not of unsuccessful attempts to replicate this finding (Pashler, Spellman, & Holcombe, n.d.); this is sometimes known as a Type I Error. Without replication, scientists may not identify these types of errors (Francis, 2012). Therefore, studies should be replicated in order to support or refute the validity of results and identify potential problems with previous conclusions. This poster presents an example from the psychology department to illustrate the importance of replication. Unique and exciting findings from a recently completed Masterâ’s thesis suggested that physiological compensatory responses occur in smokers under specific conditions. An independent replication of this study does not appear to be able to replicate the initial, very intriguing, findings.

References: Francis, G. (2012). The psychology of replication and replication in psychology. Perspectives On Psychological Science, 7(6), 585-594. doi:10.1177/1745691612459520 Kennedy, C.H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. Koocher, G.P., Keith-Spiegal, P. (2008). Ethics in psychology and the mental health professions: Standards and cases. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Pashler, H., Spellman, B., & Holcombe, A. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.psychfiledrawer.org/TheFiledrawerProblem.php

Location

DeRosa University Center, Ballroom

Start Date

26-4-2014 2:00 PM

End Date

26-4-2014 4:00 PM

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 26th, 2:00 PM Apr 26th, 4:00 PM

Replicate to Validate: The Importance of Replication in Science

DeRosa University Center, Ballroom

There is increasing pressure to publish unique scientific findings in academia. However, funding sources usually do not support replication research; because of this, many scholarly journals do not publish pure replication findings (Koocher & Keith-Speigel, 2008). Unfortunately, this diminishes researchers’ incentive to repeat the work of other scholars. Nevertheless, replication is a vital component to the scientific process because “no single study could answer all the relevant questions, but conducting a range of studies, each asking a slightly different question, both checks the results of previous studies and extends those studies in new directions” (Kennedy, 2005, p. 9). Several problems arise when independent researchers do not conduct replications. One such problem is known as the file-drawer effect. This occurs when consumers of scientific literature only learn of a single significant finding and not of unsuccessful attempts to replicate this finding (Pashler, Spellman, & Holcombe, n.d.); this is sometimes known as a Type I Error. Without replication, scientists may not identify these types of errors (Francis, 2012). Therefore, studies should be replicated in order to support or refute the validity of results and identify potential problems with previous conclusions. This poster presents an example from the psychology department to illustrate the importance of replication. Unique and exciting findings from a recently completed Masterâ’s thesis suggested that physiological compensatory responses occur in smokers under specific conditions. An independent replication of this study does not appear to be able to replicate the initial, very intriguing, findings.

References: Francis, G. (2012). The psychology of replication and replication in psychology. Perspectives On Psychological Science, 7(6), 585-594. doi:10.1177/1745691612459520 Kennedy, C.H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. Koocher, G.P., Keith-Spiegal, P. (2008). Ethics in psychology and the mental health professions: Standards and cases. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Pashler, H., Spellman, B., & Holcombe, A. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.psychfiledrawer.org/TheFiledrawerProblem.php