Image credit: The Guardian

The foundations of psychological studies are shaking, after researchers found that out of 100 studies, only 35 proved to be valid. The studies are published in three leading psychology journals. However, some experts claim that even though the studies can’t be replicated, there are ways to fix the problem.

Dorothy Bishop, professor of developmental neuropsychology at the University of Oxford, said that there are useful methods to fix the process so that studies are more likely to hold up under scrutiny.

“I see this study as illustrating that we have a problem, one that could be tackled,” she said.

She recommends imposing mandatory research methods beforehand to prevent researchers from picking only the most favorable data for analysis. In addition to that, adequate sample sizes and wider reporting of studies that show null result should be pushed.

Moreover, Gilbert Chin, senior editor of the journal Science, said it is important to take note that the disappointing outcome of analysis does not directly speak to the validity or the falsity of the theories.

“Not everything we do gets published. Novel, positive and tidy results are more likely to survive peer review and this can lead to publication biases that leave out negative results and studies that do not fit the story that we have,” he said in a statement.

The project to scrutinize studies is called Reproducibility Project. It was conducted by 270 researchers from five continents.

They analyzed the validity of studies published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology andPsychological Science –the premier outlet of all psychological studies.

“We see this is a call to action, both to the research community to do more replication, and to funders and journals to address the dysfunctional incentives,” said Brian Nosek from university of Virginia and executive director of the Center for Open Science.

Some experts say that problems arise when researchers cherry-pick their data, which they deemed as “significant”, or in other case when the study sample is too small that false negatives or false positives arise.

It is important that studies are valid to help future researchers advanced in their field. If these are not proven to be true, a number of studies might also label as invalid and create a domino effect on the field of study.

Sources: NatureWorldReport.com and Today.com