Skip to content

GCRI · Labs

Riproducibilità e risultati negativi

Science corrects itself only when failures are recorded: replications that did not reproduce, experiments that found nothing, errors found after publication. Many of these records never appear, so the published literature overstates effects and certainty. This page sets out how irreproducibility arises, how replication and correction work, which records exist, and what editors, integrity offices and funders rely on when they correct or retract.

01Registrare

Reproducibility and negative results on the record.

02La domanda

Reproducibility and negative results: how the risk develops.

Failure records and corrections. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.

Meccanismo

Publication bias filters the record

Significant, novel results are more likely to be written up, accepted and cited than null ones. The literature then shows a biased sample of what was studied, and meta-analyses inherit the bias.

Meccanismo

Errors propagate through citation

A flawed or retracted paper keeps being cited, often without mention of its status. Reviews, guidelines and later studies that build on it carry the error forward, sometimes long after the notice.

Meccanismo

Reproduction fails for ordinary reasons

Missing code, undocumented software versions, unshared reagents, unclear methods and lost raw data stop others from repeating an analysis or experiment, even when the original work was honest.

Meccanismo

Correction is slow and uneven

Investigations take time, journals differ in how they flag problems, and retraction notices can be vague. Readers may not learn that a paper was corrected, and databases may not carry the notice forward.

03Monitoraggio

Bacheca di protocolli e replicazioni.

La schermata che un gruppo utilizzerebbe per seguire questo tema: misure, stati e decisioni. I nomi sono esempi e i valori sono illustrativi.

Pannello di protocolli e replicazione

Reproducibility and negative results · Labs · Quarter 1

Due repliche in esecuzioneGCRI · Labs

Protocolli

PR-594 sensor driftEsperimento sul campoSìApprovatoIn esecuzione
PR-714 AI triageRandomizzatoSìCondizioniConfigurazione
PR-551 message recallEsperimento di indagineSìApprovatoCompletato
PR-896 heat exposureCoorteNoIn sospesoBozza

Replication R-20

Effetto originale
0.3 SD
Effetto di replica
0.3 SD
Verdetto
Più piccolo, stesso segno
Pubblicato
con dati e codice

Disponibilità dei banchi di prova

Protocol and replication board: the screen’s structure, terms and states for Reproducibility and negative results.Nomi di esempio e valori illustrativi; un progetto, non un registro né un sistema attivo.
04In the five domains

Negative results matter in every domain.

Negative results are published in the serie Labs Evidence. The National Academies’ report (2019) distinguishes reproducibility from replicability; DORA (2012) supports assessing research on its merits.

  • Negative results.
  • Replication attempts.
05Metodi ed evidenze

How reproducibility and negative results is modelled, measured and tested.

Il modello, le sue ipotesi, i suoi dati e la sua incertezza, nella forma in cui uno scienziato o un ingegnere li verificherebbe. Le strutture seguono metodi pubblicati. I valori rappresentati sono illustrativi, non risultati.

Modello, equazioni e ipotesi

The model structure used for reproducibility and negative results, the assumptions it makes and how each is tested.

Rischio dell'elemento iRi = f(Hi, Ei, Vi, Ci)pericolo, esposizione, vulnerabilità e capacità di risposta
Perdita annua attesaEAL = ∑k pk · Lksu eventi k con probabilità annua pk
Sistemi accoppiatixt+1 = A xt + B ut + εtA carries the couplings, u the shock, ε the error
IpotesiPerché è realizzatoCome viene testato
Pericolo ed esposizione sono indipendenti all'interno di un eventoMantiene trattabile l'integrale delle perditeConfrontare con un adattamento di copula su registrazioni congiunte
Gli accoppiamenti sono lineari vicino al punto di funzionamentoConsente agli shock di propagarsi attraverso APerturbare oltre l'intervallo lineare e confrontare
Le curve di vulnerabilità si trasferiscono da un luogo all'altroLe curve locali sono raramente disponibiliValidare rispetto alle perdite osservate, dove esistono
Input
set di dati versionati con provenienza
Risultati
distribuzioni, mai valori singoli
Codice
pubblicato con la scheda del modello e i test
Riproduzione
stessi dati, codice, ambiente e seed
Formulazioni standard del rischio e dello spazio degli stati; le ipotesi elencate sono tipiche del metodo, dichiarate per la revisione, non risultati.
Principi guida FAIR · GO FAIR e FORCE11W3C PROV · World Wide Web ConsortiumGuidance on consistent treatment of uncertainties · IPCCCEOS Analysis Ready Data · Comitato sui satelliti per l'osservazione della Terra
06Indicatori

Cosa viene misurato e con quale accuratezza.

Ogni indicatore riporta la sua unità, la sua cadenza, il tipo di fonte su cui si basa e l'etichetta di evidenza che un valore riporterebbe. Non sono mostrati valori: un programma li fornisce sotto la propria autorità.

IndicatoreUnitàCadenzaTipo di fonteEtichetta
Computational reproducibilitypercent of sampled studies regenerated from shared code and dataper auditReproducibility auditsOSSERVATO
Replication outcomeproportion of replications meeting the prespecified criterionper programmeCoordinated replication projectsOSSERVATO
Retraction noticescount by field and reasonannualeRetraction Watch database via CrossrefStatistiche pubblicate
Time from concern to correctionmesiper caseJournal and integrity office recordsRIPORTATO
Post-retraction citationscitations per retracted articleannualeCitation data linked to retraction recordsOSSERVATO
Null and negative results depositedcount of recordsannualeRepositories and registriesRIPORTATO
Data available on requestpercent of articles whose data could be obtainedper auditData request auditsOSSERVATO
07Fonti

Da dove provengono le evidenze.

Set di dati pubblici e registri istituzionali specifici, ciascuno con la sua classe di licenza. Le fonti soggette ad accordo sono utilizzate solo alle relative condizioni e mai ripubblicate.

FonteCosa fornisceClasse di licenza
Retraction Watch database (Crossref)Retractions, corrections and expressions of concern with reasonsAperto, attribuzione
Crossref metadata and Crossmark updatesLinks from articles to their corrections and retractionsOpen metadata, no restrictions
OpenAlexWorks, citations, authors and institutions across disciplinesAperto, CC0
FORRT Replication DatabaseReplication attempts and outcomes, mostly in the social and behavioural sciencesAperto, attribuzione
OSF projects of coordinated replication programmesProtocols, data and code of large-scale replicationsOpen, licence per project
PubPeerPost-publication comments identifying possible problems in papersFree access, terms of use
Zenodo (CERN)Citable deposits for null results, data and codeOpen, licence per record
08Decisioni

Chi decide, e a cosa servono le evidenze.

Laboratori prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.

Chi decideLa domandaEvidenze fornite da questa pagina
Journal editors and publishersWhether to correct, retract or issue an expression of concernEvidence of error or misconduct, author response, COPE guidance, reproduction attempts
Research integrity officesWhether an allegation is substantiated and what followsRaw data, records, code, interviews and an independent analysis
Finanziatori della ricercaWhether to fund replications and require data and code sharingReproducibility audit results, replication evidence by field, cost of sharing
Guideline developers and systematic reviewersWhether to rely on a study that has been questioned or correctedRetraction and correction status, replication evidence, risk-of-bias assessment

Output prodotti da questo argomento

  • Replication protocols registered before data collection, with success criteria fixed
  • Reproducibility records listing code, data, environment and the outcome of each rerun
  • Deposits of null and negative results with full methods
  • Correction logs that link each notice to the works affected
09Questioni centrali

What experts ask about reproducibility.

  • Can an independent team re-run the analysis from the published data and code?
  • Has the finding been replicated with new data, in a new setting or by a different team?
  • Which null or negative results exist, and where are they recorded?
  • When an error is found, how is it corrected and how are users of the result told?
  • Which parts of a workflow, such as software versions or random seeds, could change the answer?
10Meccanismi e fattori

Why results fail to reproduce.

Many published findings in several disciplines have proved difficult to replicate. The causes are well understood: small samples, flexible analysis, selective reporting, undocumented data processing and incentives that favour novel positive findings. In computational work, results can also depend on software versions, hardware, random seeds and data that change after publication.

Negative results are under-reported because they are harder to publish and seem less interesting. This distorts the evidence base: if only successful trials of an intervention are visible, the intervention looks more effective than it is. Systematic reviews and models built on that evidence inherit the bias.

Corrections matter for the same reason. An error in a widely used dataset or model can propagate into many downstream analyses before it is found.

11Metodi e dati

Practices that support reproducibility.

  1. 01

    Open data and code

    Sharing the materials needed to re-run an analysis, within privacy and licensing limits. Some data cannot be shared and must be described instead.

  2. 02

    Computational environments

    Recording software versions and environments, a practice developed with modellazione riproducibile. Long-term preservation remains hard.

  3. 03

    Registered reports

    Peer review of the protocol before results exist, so publication does not depend on the outcome.

  4. 04

    Correction records

    Dated, visible corrections linked to the original result, rather than silent replacement.

A failed replication does not by itself show the original was wrong; differences in setting, sample or method must be examined before conclusions are drawn.

12Metodi

Come viene studiato, e cosa i metodi non possono dire.

13Where this page’s references

Where this page’s references lead.

Gli organismi e i documenti alla luce dei quali si legge questa pagina. Stato ed edizioni cambiano; ogni link porta all'organismo emittente.

14Domande

Domande e risposte.

What is the difference between reproducibility and replicability?
In the usage of the US National Academies, reproducibility means obtaining the same results from the same data and code, and replicability means obtaining consistent results from new data. Usage varies by field, so definitions should be stated.
Why publish negative results?
They show what did not work, prevent wasted repetition and correct the bias that makes effects look larger than they are. A well-designed study with a null result is a finding.
Does retraction always mean misconduct?
No. Papers are also retracted for honest error, irreproducible results or publisher problems. COPE guidance asks that each notice states the reason.
Can a retracted paper still be cited?
It can be cited as retracted, for example in studies of the literature. Citing it as valid evidence is an error that reviewers and editors should catch.
Will Labs publish a study that found nothing?
Yes. A well-conducted study with a null result is designed to be recorded with the same detail as a positive one.
How do I report an error in a Labs result?
Use the correction routes on the Labs trust page. La conferma di ricezione fornisce un riferimento e indica il passo successivo.
Are corrected results removed?
No. The original stays visible with a dated correction, so anyone who used it can see what changed.
RapportiContribuisci

Contribuisci con evidenze da questa pagina.

Rapporti is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.

GCRILaboratoriEvidenze di LabsMetodi e aspetti tecnici
Laboratori

Porta un metodo, un set di dati o una domanda.

Informazioni e richieste sono aperte oggi. Una richiesta riceve un riferimento e indica il passo successivo; candidature, pagamenti, assegnazioni di calcolo e registrazioni si aprono solo quando esistono il team, le condizioni e la capacità di revisione.