Survey sheds light on the ‘crisis’ rocking research.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Change history
28 July 2016
An earlier version of the graphic ‘Is there a reproducibility crisis’ inadvertently switched the labels for ‘Don’t know’ and ‘No, there is no crisis’. The labels are now with the correct percentages.
References
Open Science Collaboration Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716 (2015).
Begley, C. G. & Ellis, L. M. Nature 483, 531–533 (2012).
Patel, R. & Alahmad, A. J. Fluids Barriers CNS 13, 6 (2016).
da Silva, C. F. et al. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57, 5307–5314 (2013).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Electronic supplementary material
Reproducibility
Related links
Related links
Related links in Nature Research
Psychology’s reproducibility problem is exaggerated – say psychologists 2016-Mar-03
How many replication studies are enough? 2016-Feb-26
Reproducibility: A tragedy of errors 2016-Feb-03
How scientists fool themselves – and how they can stop 2015-Oct-07
Robust research: Institutions must do their part for reproducibility 2015-Sep-01
Scientific method: Statistical errors 2014-Feb-12
Nature special: Challenges in irreproducible research
Related external links
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Baker, M. 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature 533, 452–454 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a