After reading both New York Times – articles “Psychology Findings Not as Strong as Claimed, Study Says” by Benedict Carey and “Psychology Is Not in Crisis” by Lisa Feldman Barrett. I believe that scientific research is not in crisis or that the 100 reran original experiments are worthless. However, I do believe that failure to replicate is a normal part of how science works. Science defined is the study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws. Which could mean that there is something happening, that science does not understand, this not a sign of untrustworthiness.
In addition, like Barrett reported in her article that failure to replicate is true only under certain conditions. Also stated by Dr. Schwarz a professor of psychology at the University of Southern California, in Carey’s article that the reran replication studies themselves were never evaluated for errors in design or analysis. So when a scientific study fails to be replicated, it might suggest that the current understandings of the study or such methods of testing…show more content… Writing a scientific paper requires precise descriptive method and material detail such as study design procedures, particular techniques used, specialized equipment including brand names, temporal, spatial, and historical description of the study area and studied population, description of the specific activity and statistical methods including software programs all should be carefully recorded in order to be replicated. Another reason a study might fail could be if there are modifications done to the study techniques that the researchers mistakenly leave out of the method detail. In addition, it is most helpful if the method section illustrates in a chronological order, to describe each procedure in the order