Retractions Without Ruin Indicate Robustness

Updated: 2025.10.07 14D ago 2 sources
If retracting even high‑profile fraudulent studies doesn’t topple theories, that can mean core findings are supported by many independent results. The right lesson isn’t that a field is empty, but that single studies—however flashy—aren’t load‑bearing in a cumulative science. — This reframes the replication crisis narrative and guides media, funders, and policymakers to judge fields by the strength of converging evidence rather than the fate of headline papers.

Sources

Are most published research findings false? Trends in statistical power, publication selection bias, and the false discovery rate in psychology (1975–2017) - PMC
2025.10.07 70% relevant
By estimating that only about 17.7% of significant psychology results are likely false despite publication bias and p-hacking, the paper supports the notion that core findings in a field can remain robust even amid fraud and replication failures, rather than implying wholesale collapse.
Psychology is ok
Paul Bloom 2025.08.19 100% relevant
Bloom’s response to Adam Mastroianni cites Diederik Stapel’s fraud and contrasts it with robust effects like the word‑frequency advantage.
← Back to All Ideas