Replication as a pillar of science is described in the context of the replication crisis that first struck psychology but spread quickly to other science-based fields. Empirical evidence suggests that the crisis is real but not well understood. We explain why replication often fails in science and how research in home health can be strengthened by a greater understanding of the value of replication and current thinking about replication success or failure decisions. We conclude with a call for replication in home health nursing that couples original research and replication in the same report.
SimonsDJ.The value of direct replication. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2014;9(1):76-80. doi:10.1177/1745691613514755.
2.
RauscherFHShawGHKyKN.Music and spatial task performance. Nature. 1993;365(644):611.
3.
LilienfeldSOLynnSJRuscioJBeyersteinBL.50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions About Human Behavior. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
4.
SuterWN.Introduction to Educational Research: A Critical Thinking Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA; SAGE; 2012.
5.
EarpBDTrafimowD.Replication, falsification, and the crisis of confidence in social psychology. Front Psychol. 2015;6(621):1-11. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00621.
Open Science Collaboration. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015;349(943):aac4716. doi:10.1126/science.aac4716.
8.
CamererCFDreberAHoltzmeisterF.Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nat Hum Behav. 2018;2(9):637-644. doi:10.31235/osf.io/4hmb6.
SchmidtS.Shall we really do it again? the power concept of replication is neglected in the social sciences. Rev Gen Psychol. 2009;13(2):90-100. doi:10.1037/a0015108
11.
VanBavelJJMende-SiedleckiPBradyWJReineroDA.Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016;113(23):6454-6459. doi:10.1073/pnas.1521897113
12.
SchoolerJW. Metascience could rescue the “replication crisis.”Nature. 2014;515(7525):9. doi:10.1038/515009a.
13.
BemDJ.Feeling the future: experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influence on cognition and affect. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011;100(3):407-425. doi:10.1037/a0021524.
14.
RitchieSJWisemaRFrenchC. Failing the future: three unsuccessful replications of Bem’s “retroactive facilitation of recall” effect. 2012. PLoS One. 7(3):e33423. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033423
15.
GalakJLeBoeufRANelsonLDSimmonsJP.Correcting the past: failures to replicate psi. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012;103(6):933-948. doi:10.1037/a0029709
JohnLKLoewensteinGPrelecD.Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychol Sci. 2012;23(5):524-532. doi:10.1177/0956797611430953
EmslieC.Women, men and coronary heart disease: a review of the qualitative literature. J Adv Nurs. 2005;51(4):382-395. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03509.x
20.
Announcement: reducing our irreproducibility. Nature. 2013;496:398. doi:10.1038/496398a Published April 24, 2013. Accessed February 23, 2019.
21.
Announcement: toward greater reproducibility for life-sciences research in Nature. Nature. 2017;546:8. doi:10.1038/546008a.
22.
BakerM.1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature. 2016;533(7604):452-454. doi:10.1038/533452a.
23.
PetersonGGZurovacJBrownRS, et al. Testing the replicability of a successful care management program: results from a randomized trial and likely explanations for why impacts did not replicate. Health Serv Res. 2016;51(6):2115-2139. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12595
FanelliDCostasRIoannidisJP.Meta-assessment of bias in science. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(14):3714-3719. doi:10.1073/pnas.1618569114
28.
BrandtMJIJzermanHDijksterhuisA, et al. The replication recipe: what makes for a convincing replication?J Exp Soc Psychol. 2014;50(1):217-224. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.005
29.
MorinKH.Replication: needed now more than ever. J Nurs Educ. 2016;55(8):423-424. doi:10.3928/01484834-20160715-01
