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).

 ReplicationsP < 0.05 inoriginal direction Effect sizedifference Meta-analyticestimate Original effectsize withinreplication 95% CI Subjective “yes”to “Did it replicate?” Original study characteristics Original P value –0.327 –0.057 –0.468 0.032 –0.260 Original effect size 0.304 0.279 0.793 0.121 0.277 Original df/N –0.150 –0.194 –0.502 –0.221 –0.185 Importance of original result –0.105 0.038 –0.205 –0.133 –0.074 Surprising original result –0.244 0.102 –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 –0.828 0.621 –0.614 –0.562 –0.738 Replication effect size 0.731 –0.586 0.850 0.611 0.710 Replication power 0.368 –0.053 0.142 –0.056 0.285 Replication df/N –0.085 –0.224 –0.692 –0.257 –0.164 Challenge of conducting replication –0.219 0.085 –0.301 –0.109 –0.151 Experience and expertise of replication team –0.096 0.133 0.017 –0.053 –0.068 Self-assessed quality of replication –0.069 0.017 0.054 –0.088 –0.055