The majority of people interested in science look to the most recent studies for th elatest updates in our ongoing quest for understanding. According to a report from the Smithsonian, however, not all published findings can be trusted; a recent review published in the journal Science reveals that only 35 percent of the studies published in 2008 could be successfully replicated.

The study involved 270 scientists from all over the world who tried to reproduce other peoples’ studies to compare the results. Led by Brian Nosek from the University of Virginia, the study was a branch of the overarching Reproducibility Project: Psychology.

The study’s findings don’t necessarily mean that all of the science done up until this point has been wrong. When a study can’t be replicated, there are many different factors that could influence the results.

According to Cody Christopherson from Southern Oregon University, “This project is not evidence that anything is broken. Rather, it’s an example of science doing what science does. It’s impossible to be wrong in a final sense in science. You have to be temporarily wrong, perhaps many times, before you are ever right.”

While the study doesn’t try to prove other research wrong, it does place pressure on future scientists to be objective and transparent with their work. A study means nothing if it only produces the desired results once; until it can be replicated, there is not data to which the findings can be compared.