Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A visual tool for defining reproducibility and replicability

  • Comment
  • Published:

From Nature Human Behaviour

View current issue Submit your manuscript

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 29 July 2019

This article has been updated

Reproducibility and replicability are fundamental requirements of scientific studies. Disagreements over universal definitions for these terms have affected the interpretation of large-scale replication attempts. We provide a visual tool for representing definitions and use it to re-examine these attempts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1: A graphic representation for the scientific process

Data and code availability

The scifigure package and its accompanying vignette can be downloaded from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=scifigure

Change history

  • 29 July 2019

    An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

References

  1. Fanelli, D. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115, 2628–2631 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kenett, R. S. & Shmueli, G. Nat. Methods 12, 699 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Open Science Collaboration. Science 349, aac4716 (2015).

  4. Peng, R. D. Science 334, 1226–1227 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gilbert, D. T., King, G., Pettigrew, S. & Wilson, T. D. Science 351, 1037 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Heller, R., Bogomolov, M. & Benjamini, Y. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 16262–16267 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Begley, C. G. & Ellis, L. M. Nature 483, 531–533 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cramer, P. E. et al. Science 335, 1503–1506 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Klein, R. A. et al. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 1, 443–490 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Baggerly, K. A. & Coombes, K. R. Ann. Appl. Stat. 3, 1309–1334 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnson, R. A. Statistics: Principles and Methods (Wiley, 2009).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA

    Prasad Patil

  2. Department of Data Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA

    Prasad Patil

  3. Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Roger D. Peng & Jeffrey T. Leek

Authors
  1. Prasad Patil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roger D. Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeffrey T. Leek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey T. Leek.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary material

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patil, P., Peng, R.D. & Leek, J.T. A visual tool for defining reproducibility and replicability. Nat Hum Behav 3, 650–652 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0629-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0629-z

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation