We recommend using the latest version of IE11, Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
The term reproducible research refers to the idea that the ultimate product of academic research is the paper along with the full computational environment used to produce the results in the paper such as the code, data, text files, etc., that can be used to reproduce the results and create new work based on the research.
Goodman, S. N., Fanelli, D., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2016). What does research reproducibility mean? Science Translational Medicine, 8(341). doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027
Reproducibility: “the ability of a researcher to duplicate the results of a prior study using the same materials as were used by the original investigator. That is, a second researcher might use the same raw data to build the same analysis files and implement the same statistical analysis in an attempt to yield the same results…. Reproducibility is a minimum necessary condition for a finding to be believable and informative.”
Replicability: "The ability of a researcher to duplicate the results of a prior study if the same procedures are followed but new data are collected."
Report of the Subcommittee on Replicability in Science Advisory Committee, - U.S. National Science Foundation, 2015
Reproducible research (computational reproducibility): Authors provide all the necessary data and the computer codes to run the analysis again, re-creating the results.
Replication: A study that arrives at the same scientific findings as another study, collecting new data (possibly with different methods), and completing new analyses.
Science 334.6060 (2011): 1226-1227.
Computing in Science & Engineering Volume: 14, Issue: 4, July-Aug. 2012
A guide to computing workflows with the biologist end-user in mind. PLoS Biology. November 2015 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002303
The New York Times. September 24, 2018. Covers research and publication bias. Links to several studies.
PLoS Biol 13(6): e1002165. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002165
Nature News, 533(7604), 452.
Nature News, 548(7668), 387.
Science advances 7.21 (2021): eabd1705.
Australian Economic Review 51.2 (2018): 286-300.
National Association of Scholars. 221 Witherspoon Street 2nd Floor, Princeton, NJ 08542-3215, 2018.
PLoS medicine 2.8 (2005): e124.
Science. August 2015 Volume 349 Issue 6251
PLoS Biol 11(7): e1001609. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001609
Editorial in Molecular Brain, February 2020
UK Academy of Medical Sciences symposium report. October 2015.
PLoS computational biology 9.10 (2013): e1003285.
Bishop's “Four Horsemen of Irreproducibility Apocalypse” - Main factors that may lead to irreproducible or false positive research:
(2018). Checklists work to improve science. Nature, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-04590-7 ; Bishop, D. (2019). Rein in the four horsemen of irreproducibility. Nature, 568(7753), 435-436.; Dumas-Mallet, E., Button, K. S., Boraud, T., Gonon, F., & Munafò, M. R. (2017). Low statistical power in biomedical science: a review of three human research domains. Royal Society Open Science, 4(2), 160254. ; Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196-217.
Reproduced from: https://libguides.tulane.edu/reproducibility under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.