In 2011, the Reproducibility Project set out to replicate the findings of experiments that had been published in three top psychology journals in 2008. Today, their results were released, and they weren’t very good.
According to SmithsonianMag.com, “fewer than half” of the 100 studies that were part of the project were successfully replicated.
While that might not sound very impressive to the layman, the scientists behind the project were quick to point out that its findings were not necessarily an indictment of modern psychology.
“This project is not evidence that anything is broken. Rather, it’s an example of science doing what science does,” said the project’s co-author Cody Christopherson of Southern Oregon University. “Getting it right means regularly revisiting past assumptions and past results and finding new ways to test them. The only way science is successful and credible is if it is self-critical.“
And as SmithsonianMag’s Brian Handwerk points out:
Across the sciences, research is considered reproducible when an independent team can conduct a published experiment, following the original methods as closely as possible, and get the same results. It’s one key part of the process for building evidence to support theories. Even today, 100 years after Albert Einstein presented his general theory of relativity, scientists regularly repeat tests of its predictions and look for cases where his famous description of gravity does not apply.
Whatever. I knew L. Ron Hubbard was on to something. You people can keep your phony balony "science.” I’m going to get my thetan levels checked.