Title: Reproducibility
Headings: 
Reproducibility
Reproducibility vs. Repeatability
The Process of Replicating Research
Reproducibility and Generalization - A Cautious Approach
Reproducibility is not Essential
Reproducibility - An Impossible Ideal?
Reproducibility and Specificity - A Geological Example
Reproducibility and Archaeology - The Absurdity of Creationism
Bibliography
Full reference:
You Are Allowed To Copy The Text
Want to stay up to date? Follow us!

Content: Extending this to all children means that the experiment is prone to replication issues - A researcher finding that aggression did not increase in nine year old children would invalidate the entire premise by questioning the reproducibility. Reproducibility is not Essential
It is important to understand that creating replicable research is not essential for validity, although it does help. Sometimes, due to sheer impracticality, temporal difficulties, or expense, this is not possible. The Framingham Heart Study, an experiment testing three generations of nurses for cardiac issues, has been going on for over 60 years and nobody is seriously expected to replicate it. Instead, results from other studies around the world are used to build up a database of statistical evidence supporting the findings. Reproducibility - An Impossible Ideal? Many scientists argue that reproducibility is not an important factor for many sciences observing natural phenomena, such as astronomy, geology and, notoriously, evolution. The rise of the Intelligent Design movement has seen evolutionary science under attack, because creationists claim that evolution is not reproducible and, therefore, it is not valid. This has opened up an intense debate about the role of replication study as, for example, a geologist cannot very well recreate conditions found on the primordial earth and observe rocks metamorphosing. However, creationists misunderstand the idea of reproducibility and assume that it applies to an entire theory.