Table 2 Spearman’s rank-order correlations of reproducibility indicators with summary original and replication study characteristics.

Effect size difference computed after converting r to Fisher’s z. df/N refers to the information on which the test of the effect was based (for example, df of t test, denominator df of F test, sample size –3 of correlation, and sample size for z and χ2). Four original results had P values slightly higher than 0.05 but were considered positive results in the original article and are treated that way here. Exclusions (explanation provided in supplementary materials, A3) are “replications P < .05” (3 original nulls excluded; n = 97 studies), “effect size difference” (3 excluded; n = 97 studies); “meta-analytic mean estimates” (27 excluded; n = 73 studies); and, “percent original effect size within replication 95% CI” (5 excluded, n = 95 studies).

Replications
P < 0.05 in
original direction
Effect size
difference
Meta-analytic
estimate
Original effect
size within
replication 95% CI
Subjective “yes”
to “Did it replicate?”
Original study characteristics
Original P value–0.327–0.057–0.4680.032–0.260
Original effect size0.3040.2790.7930.1210.277
Original df/N–0.150–0.194–0.502–0.221–0.185
Importance of original result–0.1050.038–0.205–0.133–0.074
Surprising original result–0.2440.102–0.181–0.113–0.241
Experience and expertise of original team–0.072–0.033–0.059–0.103–0.044
Replication characteristics
Replication P value–0.8280.621–0.614–0.562–0.738
Replication effect size0.731–0.5860.8500.6110.710
Replication power0.368–0.0530.142–0.0560.285
Replication df/N–0.085–0.224–0.692–0.257–0.164
Challenge of conducting replication–0.2190.085–0.301–0.109–0.151
Experience and expertise of replication team–0.0960.1330.017–0.053–0.068
Self-assessed quality of replication–0.0690.0170.054–0.088–0.055