Opinion: Is science really facing a reproducibility crisis, and do we need it to?

Meta-assessment of bias in science

(2017) Daniele Fanelli et al.   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Empirical assessment of published effect sizes and power in the recent cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature

(2017) Denes Szucs et al.   PLOS BIOLOGY

Low statistical power in biomedical science: a review of three human research domains

(2017) Estelle Dumas-Mallet et al.   Royal Society Open Science

1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility

(2016) Monya Baker   NATURE

Researchers’ Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century

(2016) Daniele Fanelli et al.   PLoS One

Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility

(2016) Jay J. Van Bavel et al.   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics

(2016) C. F. Camerer et al.   SCIENCE

What does research reproducibility mean?

(2016) Steven N. Goodman et al.   Science Translational Medicine

The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications

(2016) Elisabeth M. Bik et al.   mBio

Problems in usingp-curve analysis and text-mining to detect rate ofp-hacking and evidential value

(2016) Dorothy V.M. Bishop et al.   PeerJ

A Bayesian Perspective on the Reproducibility Project: Psychology

(2016) Alexander Etz et al.   PLoS One

p-Curve and p-Hacking in Observational Research

(2016) Stephan B. Bruns et al.   PLoS One

Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity

(2015) Daniele Fanelli et al.   PLoS One

Accelerating scientific publication in biology

(2015) Ronald D. Vale   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science

(2015)   SCIENCE

Meta-research: Evaluation and Improvement of Research Methods and Practices

(2015) John P. A. Ioannidis et al.   PLOS BIOLOGY

The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science

(2015) Megan L. Head et al.   PLOS BIOLOGY

A surge ofp-values between 0.041 and 0.049 in recent decades (but negative results are increasing rapidly too)

(2015) Joost CF de Winter et al.   PeerJ

Rising complexity and falling explanatory power in ecology

(2014) Etienne Low-Décarie et al.   FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT

The N-Pact Factor: Evaluating the Quality of Empirical Journals with Respect to Sample Size and Statistical Power

(2014) R. Chris Fraley et al.   PLoS One

Quantifying the complexity of medical research

(2013) R. Rodriguez-Esteban et al.   BIOINFORMATICS

An estimate of the science-wise false discovery rate and application to the top medical literature

(2013) L. R. Jager et al.   BIOSTATISTICS

Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience

(2013) Katherine S. Button et al.   NATURE REVIEWS NEUROSCIENCE

Why Growing Retractions Are (Mostly) a Good Sign

(2013) Daniele Fanelli   PLOS MEDICINE

Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries

(2011) Daniele Fanelli   SCIENTOMETRICS

Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data

(2010) Daniele Fanelli   PLoS One

Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases

(2010) Marco Pautasso   SCIENTOMETRICS

How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data

(2009) Daniele Fanelli   PLoS One

Letter to the Editor: Bias in genetic association studies: effects of research location and resources

(2008) MARCUS R. MUNAFÒ et al.   PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE