Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The current controversy surrounding research replication in biomedical and psychosocial sciences often overlooks the uncertainties surrounding both the original and replication studies. Overemphasizing single attempts as definitive replication successes or failures, as exemplified by media coverage of the landmark Reproducibility Project: Psychology, fosters misleading dichotomies and erodes public trust. To avoid such unintended consequences, science communicators should more clearly articulate statistical variation and other uncertainty sources in replication, while emphasizing the cumulative nature of science in general and replication in particular.
Ting et al. (2024) studied this question.