I don’t think the idea is psychology is, or should be, and exact science. But failing to replicate for 60% isn’t an issue of being exact or imprecise, it’s just

I don’t think the idea is psychology is, or should be, and exact science. But failing to replicate for 60% isn’t an issue of being exact or imprecise, it’s just bad or wrong or fraudulent. I don’t the counter to cited studies showing problems is criticizing the web site presenting them, but making substantial claims to refute. Or ideas for improving. Some of the ideas called out- preregistration, open data, more systematic reviews- are good and should be embraced by psychologists who want to have a reputable science. Not an exact science.