Assuming that everything in this pdf is correct, the conclusion should be that the "The Reproducibility Project: Psychology" does not provide evidence one way o

Assuming that everything in this pdf is correct, the conclusion should be that the "The Reproducibility Project: Psychology" does not provide evidence one way or another. There may be replication crisis, but the study could not tell the difference between replication crisis and 100% reproducibility. But today there are a lot more studies that find issues with replicability: - Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Samples and Settings: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2515245918810225 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2515245918810225 - Reproducible brain-wide association studies require thousands of individuals: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04492-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04492-9 - Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0399-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0399-z - Raise standards for preclinical cancer research: https://www.nature.com/articles/483531a https://www.nature.com/articles/483531a - Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology: https://www.cos.io/rpcb https://www.cos.io/rpcb - A Survey on Data Reproducibility in Cancer Research Provides Insights into Our Limited Ability to Translate Findings from the Laboratory to the Clinic: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063221 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...