تکرارپذیری به‌مثابه مفهومی زمینه‌مند: بازاندیشی در بحران تکرارپذیری علم

Amrhein, V., Greenland, S., & McShane, B. (2019). Retire statistical significance. Nature, 567, 305–307.

Baker, M. (2016a). Is there a reproducibility crisis? Nature, 533, 452–454.

Benjamin, D., James O. Berger, Magnus Johannesson, Brian A. Nosek, E.-J. Wagenmakers, Richard Berk, Kenneth A. Bollen, Björn Brembs, Lawrence Brown, Colin Camerer, David Cesarini, Christopher D. Chambers, Merlise Clyde, Thomas D. Cook, Paul De Boeck, Zoltan Dienes, Anna Dreber, Kenny Easwaran, Charles Efferson, Ernst Fehr, Fiona Fidler, Andy P. Field, Malcolm Forster, Edward I. George, Richard Gonzalez, Steven Goodman, Edwin Green, Donald P. Green, Anthony G. Greenwald, Jarrod D. Hadfield, Larry V. Hedges, Leonhard Held, Teck Hua Ho, Herbert Hoijtink, Daniel J. Hruschka, Kosuke Imai, Guido Imbens, John P. A. Ioannidis, Minjeong Jeon, James Holland Jones, Michael Kirchler, David Laibson, John List, Roderick Little, Arthur Lupia, Edouard Machery, Scott E. Maxwell, Michael McCarthy, Don A. Moore, Stephen L. Morgan, Marcus Munafó, Shinichi Nakagawa, Brendan Nyhan, Timothy H. Parker, Luis Pericchi, Marco Perugini, Jeff Rouder, Judith Rousseau, Victoria Savalei, Felix D. Schönbrodt, Thomas Sellke, Betsy Sinclair, Dustin Tingley, Trisha Van Zandt, Simine Vazire, Duncan J. Watts, Christopher Winship, Robert L. Wolpert, Yu Xie, Cristobal Young, Jonathan Zinman & Valen E. Johnson et al. (2018). Redefine statistical significance. Nature Human Behavior, 2, 6–10.

Bird, A. (2018). Understanding the replication crisis as a base rate fallacy. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Volume 72, Number 4, December 2021, 965–993

Crane, D. (1967). The Gatekeepers of Science: Some Factors Affecting the Selection of Articles for Scientific Journals. The American Sociologist, 2(4), 195–201.

Fanelli, D. (2018). Is science really facing a reproducibility crisis, and do we need it to? PNAS, 115, 2628–2631.

Ferguson, C. J. and M. Heene (2012). A vast graveyard of undead theories: Publication bias and psychological science’s aversion to the null. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 555–561.

Francis, G. (2012). Publication bias and the failure of replication in experimental psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 975–991.

Guttinger, Stephan (2020). The limits of replicability. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 10(2), 1–17.

Hudson, R. (2021). Should We Strive to Make Science Bias-Free? A Philosophical Assessment of the Reproducibility Crisis. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 52, 389–405.

Ioannidis, J. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med, 2, e124.

John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524–532.

Lakens, D., et al. (2018). Justify your alpha. Nature Human Behavior, 2, 168–171.

Leonelli, S. (2018). Rethinking reproducibility as a criterion for research quality. In L. Fiorito, S. Scheall, & C. E. Suprinyak (Eds.), Research in the history of economic thought and methodology (pp. 129–146). Emerald Publishing Limited.

16. Longino, H. E. (1996). Cognitive and non-cognitive values in science: Rethinking the dichotomy. In L. H. Nelson & J. Nelson (Eds.), Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science (pp. 39–58). Kluwer Academic.Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, aac4716.

Pashler, H., & Harris, C. (2012a). Is the replicability crisis overblown? Three arguments examined. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 531–536.

Peterson, D., & Panofsky, A. (2021). Self-correction in science: The diagnostic and integrative motives for replication. Social Studies of Science, 51(4), 583–605.

Popper, K. (2005). The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge.

Romero, F. (2016). Can the behavioral sciences self-correct? A social epistemic study. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 60, 55–69.

Rooney, P. (2017). The borderlands between epistemic and non-epistemic values. In K. C. Elliott & D. Steel (Eds.), Current controversies in values and science (pp. 31–46). Routledge.

Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638–641.

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366.