These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

1643 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26315443)

  • 1. PSYCHOLOGY. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.
    Open Science Collaboration
    Science; 2015 Aug; 349(6251):aac4716. PubMed ID: 26315443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Internal conceptual replications do not increase independent replication success.
    Kunert R
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2016 Oct; 23(5):1631-1638. PubMed ID: 27068542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility.
    Van Bavel JJ; Mende-Siedlecki P; Brady WJ; Reinero DA
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2016 Jun; 113(23):6454-9. PubMed ID: 27217556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Examining reproducibility in psychology: A hybrid method for combining a statistically significant original study and a replication.
    van Aert RCM; van Assen MALM
    Behav Res Methods; 2018 Aug; 50(4):1515-1539. PubMed ID: 28936638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Bayesian Perspective on the Reproducibility Project: Psychology.
    Etz A; Vandekerckhove J
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(2):e0149794. PubMed ID: 26919473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. What Should Researchers Expect When They Replicate Studies? A Statistical View of Replicability in Psychological Science.
    Patil P; Peng RD; Leek JT
    Perspect Psychol Sci; 2016 Jul; 11(4):539-44. PubMed ID: 27474140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Response to Comment on "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science".
    Anderson CJ; Bahník Š; Barnett-Cowan M; Bosco FA; Chandler J; Chartier CR; Cheung F; Christopherson CD; Cordes A; Cremata EJ; Della Penna N; Estel V; Fedor A; Fitneva SA; Frank MC; Grange JA; Hartshorne JK; Hasselman F; Henninger F; van der Hulst M; Jonas KJ; Lai CK; Levitan CA; Miller JK; Moore KS; Meixner JM; Munafò MR; Neijenhuijs KI; Nilsonne G; Nosek BA; Plessow F; Prenoveau JM; Ricker AA; Schmidt K; Spies JR; Stieger S; Strohminger N; Sullivan GB; van Aert RC; van Assen MA; Vanpaemel W; Vianello M; Voracek M; Zuni K
    Science; 2016 Mar; 351(6277):1037. PubMed ID: 26941312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Methods for addressing publication bias in school psychology journals: A descriptive review of meta-analyses from 1980 to 2019.
    McClain MB; Callan GL; Harris B; Floyd RG; Haverkamp CR; Golson ME; Longhurst DN; Benallie KJ
    J Sch Psychol; 2021 Feb; 84():74-94. PubMed ID: 33581772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Are Psychology Journals Anti-replication? A Snapshot of Editorial Practices.
    Martin GN; Clarke RM
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():523. PubMed ID: 28443044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Replications in Psychology Research: How Often Do They Really Occur?
    Makel MC; Plucker JA; Hegarty B
    Perspect Psychol Sci; 2012 Nov; 7(6):537-42. PubMed ID: 26168110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Addressing the "Replication Crisis": Using Original Studies to Design Replication Studies with Appropriate Statistical Power.
    Anderson SF; Maxwell SE
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2017; 52(3):305-324. PubMed ID: 28266872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comment on "Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science".
    Gilbert DT; King G; Pettigrew S; Wilson TD
    Science; 2016 Mar; 351(6277):1037. PubMed ID: 26941311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Replication and robustness in developmental research.
    Duncan GJ; Engel M; Claessens A; Dowsett CJ
    Dev Psychol; 2014 Nov; 50(11):2417-25. PubMed ID: 25243330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. What meta-analyses reveal about the replicability of psychological research.
    Stanley TD; Carter EC; Doucouliagos H
    Psychol Bull; 2018 Dec; 144(12):1325-1346. PubMed ID: 30321017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing heterogeneity and power in replications of psychological experiments.
    Schauer JM; Hedges LV
    Psychol Bull; 2020 Aug; 146(8):701-719. PubMed ID: 32271029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Rewarding Replications: A Sure and Simple Way to Improve Psychological Science.
    Koole SL; Lakens D
    Perspect Psychol Sci; 2012 Nov; 7(6):608-14. PubMed ID: 26168120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Replication initiatives will not salvage the trustworthiness of psychology.
    Coyne JC
    BMC Psychol; 2016 May; 4(1):28. PubMed ID: 27245324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals.
    Callaham M; Wears RL; Weber E
    JAMA; 2002 Jun; 287(21):2847-50. PubMed ID: 12038930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing meta-analyses and preregistered multiple-laboratory replication projects.
    Kvarven A; Strømland E; Johannesson M
    Nat Hum Behav; 2020 Apr; 4(4):423-434. PubMed ID: 31873200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Registered reports and replications: An ongoing Journal of School Psychology initiative.
    Braden JP
    J Sch Psychol; 2024 Apr; 103():101294. PubMed ID: 38432736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 83.