Are most published social psychological findings false?

Abstract

Based on Bayesian reasoning, Ioannidis (2005) made the bold claim that most published research findings are false. His claim has been widely cited. It also seems consistent with the findings of the Open Science Collaboration Project that a majority of psychological studies could not be replicated. In this article, I argue (1) that Ioannidis' claim has limited relevance for social psychology and (2) that mass replication does not allow general conclusions about the validity of social psychological research. Ioannidis´ claim is valid only for one-shot studies without replication and with a low a priori probability that the tested hypothesis is true. Mass replication provides limited information about the validity of social psychological research, because failures to replicate do not prove that the original finding is invalid. More conclusive information is provided by meta-analytic tests of social psychological theories. Implications for research in social psychology are discussed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 74 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.