Is there a reproducibility crisis in science? - Matt Anticole

Published scientific studies can motivate research, inspire products, and inform policy. However, recent studies that examined dozens of published pharmaceutical papers managed to replicate the results of less than 25% of them — and similar results have been found in other scientific disciplines. How do we combat this crisis of scientific irreproducibility? Matt Anticole investigates.

Lesson by Matt Anticole, animation by Brett Underhill.

[sukossje]

Psychology is the first thing that came to mind. Alot of experiments can't be reproduced, but students are still learning about them in schools like they're valid.

[nitelite]

2:11

If a study cannot be reproduced because it is unclear what the original study was or what the original study group did (as suggested in the video) then the original study should not be considered scientific.

[samimas]

universities should make courses for first and second years students to replicate studies.
this way students can have hand on experience in doing research and those research would be verified.

[Outrigger]

"If you thought science was certain, well, that was just an error on your part." ~Richard Feynman, scientist, Nobel Prize winner

[PotatoShadow]

0:39 Idk why but the facepalm cracked me up😂

[OskarElek]

Can't emphasize enough how well done andto the point this video is.
And it's true - it really comes down to the fact that there's no motivation in the scientific community to cross-verify anything. As said, it's actually a detriment to one's career to do that, as it's a delay to career progress. Conferencies and journals are simply not interested to publish validation studies.

[boy]

Conclusion: Take EVERYTHING we read with a grain of salt.

[christophergayer]

This is outstanding and very important. Thank you for doing it. Unfortunately, publishing negative results, if you can even do it, is not likely to lead to grant funding. Without funding, you have no science. Thus, negative studies or confirmatory studies to confirm reproducibility will continue to be underemphasized (and typically just lacking) in our current model of science and research

[MluM]

Easy solution: Get Honours students, Masters students or students in their late studies to prove or disprove recently published papers as one of their assignments... and then make Mexico pay for it.

[kallebroxvall]

0:56 that guy went on to create the powerpuff girls

[TechnicalTrack]

Team work is important
It helps to put the blame on someone else :
agree?

[espoppelaars]

Thank you for not focusing solely on psychology. This is a problem for all emperical research.

[danielsykes]

The fame, funding, and career maintenance motives certainly bias the way work gets done and produce problems. I'm starting to wonder if we'll look back at today like we do the middle ages. The church used to fund most research. Nowadays it seems to be corporations that fund most of it.

Honestly, science should be curious people coming together, and no one should have their livelihood based on certain results. This requires that people everywhere have more freetime and that we have strong peer review institutions.

We need perhaps more funding to duplicate research rather than to do original research. And that funding should be independent of corporate interests.

[Binita]

I had seniors in lab who wouldn't publish exact measurements of their data so no one could replicate it, in case they needed to sell it for patent.

[CaptTerrific]

Good topic, great points brought up... but needs TONS MORE DETAIL!

For instance, on the subtopic of improving reproducability alone: How can we incentivize more raw data availability? Why isn't it done already? Why don't papers detail their techniques sufficiently already? Why why why why why!?!? DETAILS

[stupaod]

“I think that we shall have to get accustomed to the idea that we must not look upon science as a ‘body of knowledge, ’ but rather as a system of hypotheses, or as a system of guesses or anticipations that in principle cannot be justified, but with which we work as long as they stand up to tests, and of which we are never justified in saying that we know they are ‘true’ or ‘more or less certain’ or even ‘probable.’ -Karl Popper

[markthompson]

If all "government funded" research was forced into the public domain and researchers couldn't patent said research, a lot of these problems would go away.

[ParaMeterPeter]

Great animation. Would watch again just for that.

[EverydayYounglife]

Honestly, the best thing to learn is how to remove or even just heavily suppress your personal biases(Theological, Political, Racial, ect, ..) when conducting Scientific research of any kind.

[zackrakesh]

I remember verlisium did a video on this. worth a watch for more detail.