Cargando…
Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science
In psychological science, there is an increasing concern regarding the reproducibility of scientific findings. For instance, Replication Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015) found that the proportion of successful replication in psychology was 41%. This proportion was calculated ba...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6141826/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30254594 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01657 |
_version_ | 1783355780098949120 |
---|---|
author | Cheng, Yongtian Li, Johnson Ching-Hong Liu, Xiyao |
author_facet | Cheng, Yongtian Li, Johnson Ching-Hong Liu, Xiyao |
author_sort | Cheng, Yongtian |
collection | PubMed |
description | In psychological science, there is an increasing concern regarding the reproducibility of scientific findings. For instance, Replication Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015) found that the proportion of successful replication in psychology was 41%. This proportion was calculated based on Cumming and Maillardet (2006) widely employed capture procedure (CPro) and capture percentage (CPer). Despite the popularity of CPro and CPer, we believe that using them may lead to an incorrect conclusion of (a) successful replication when the population effect sizes in the original and replicated studies are different; and (b) unsuccessful replication when the population effect sizes in the original and replicated studies are identical but their sample sizes are different. Our simulation results show that the performances of CPro and CPer become biased, such that researchers can easily make a wrong conclusion of successful/unsuccessful replication. Implications of these findings are considered in the conclusion. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6141826 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61418262018-09-25 Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science Cheng, Yongtian Li, Johnson Ching-Hong Liu, Xiyao Front Psychol Psychology In psychological science, there is an increasing concern regarding the reproducibility of scientific findings. For instance, Replication Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015) found that the proportion of successful replication in psychology was 41%. This proportion was calculated based on Cumming and Maillardet (2006) widely employed capture procedure (CPro) and capture percentage (CPer). Despite the popularity of CPro and CPer, we believe that using them may lead to an incorrect conclusion of (a) successful replication when the population effect sizes in the original and replicated studies are different; and (b) unsuccessful replication when the population effect sizes in the original and replicated studies are identical but their sample sizes are different. Our simulation results show that the performances of CPro and CPer become biased, such that researchers can easily make a wrong conclusion of successful/unsuccessful replication. Implications of these findings are considered in the conclusion. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6141826/ /pubmed/30254594 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01657 Text en Copyright © 2018 Cheng, Li and Liu. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Cheng, Yongtian Li, Johnson Ching-Hong Liu, Xiyao Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science |
title | Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science |
title_full | Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science |
title_fullStr | Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science |
title_full_unstemmed | Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science |
title_short | Limited Usefulness of Capture Procedure and Capture Percentage for Evaluating Reproducibility in Psychological Science |
title_sort | limited usefulness of capture procedure and capture percentage for evaluating reproducibility in psychological science |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6141826/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30254594 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01657 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chengyongtian limitedusefulnessofcaptureprocedureandcapturepercentageforevaluatingreproducibilityinpsychologicalscience AT lijohnsonchinghong limitedusefulnessofcaptureprocedureandcapturepercentageforevaluatingreproducibilityinpsychologicalscience AT liuxiyao limitedusefulnessofcaptureprocedureandcapturepercentageforevaluatingreproducibilityinpsychologicalscience |