In principle, a well-designed and well-documented experiment will accurately describe a real phenomenon and provide other researchers with everything they need to reproduce those results in a comparable study.
To replicate an experiment, researchers use the same methods of data collection and apply the same analysis, even though they have to use new subjects, often in somewhat different situations. Subjects may be generally older or younger, for example, or from a different country.
While later tests can’t possibly be identical to the original, they need to be similar enough to yield comparable data.
Concepts like “similar enough” and “comparable data” involve a level of subjectivity that adds to the controversy around replication. When a study fails a replication attempt, defenders often question whether the followup truly reflected the original. Researchers help to resolve such debates when they openly share their data and methods.
Recent Posts
Meet Anne Dale, Dentistry’s Unofficial Historian
The museum she curates at the Faculty of Dentistry holds thousands of objects that tell the story of the profession in Canada
Heroes of Our Time
Members of the U of T community are working alongside colleagues from around the world to respond to the pandemic
Whose Stories Do We Tell?
The Dictionary of Canadian Biography aims to record noteworthy lives from “all points of view.” Six decades into its mission, what that means is still up for debate
