How many psychology studies will survive a 2nd look?

Tom Bartlett writes in the Chronicle of Higher Education‘s Percolator blog:

Is Psychology About to Come Undone?

If you’re a psychologist, the news has to make you a little nervous—particularly if you’re a psychologist who published an article in 2008 in any of these three journals: Psychological Sciencethe Journal of Personality and Social Psychologyor the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.

Because, if you did, someone is going to check your work. A group of researchers have already begun what they’ve dubbed the Reproducibility Project, which aims to replicate every study from those three journals for that one year…. This is a more polite way of saying “We want to see how much of what gets published turns out to be bunk.”

(Thanks to Research Digest and investigator Jonathan Tolland for bringing this to our attention.)

  • Martin g

    Will that include:
     ’Objects on a Collision Path With the Observer Demand Attention’ ? (Psychological Science
    July 2008

    vol. 19

    no. 7, pp.

    686-692) http://pss.sagepub.com/content/19/7/686.abstract

  • Kujiraya3

    It is VERY common in science that many people try to replicate/reproduce interesting findings published.  Why any psychologists should be nervous about that? 
    One of my favorite remarks is:
    “It is OK if published data turn out to be wrong for time being, but it is not OK to publish data that are not interesting.”
    Does anyone remember who made the above words???