A 2015 American Psychologist article by Scott E. Maxwell, Michael Y. Lau, and George S. Howard argues that a significant original psychology study result followed by a nonsignificant single replication does not necessarily constitute a genuine failure to replicate, because the replication may have had low statistical power.
Notes on verification
Multiple independent sources (PubMed, Semantic Scholar, ResearchGate, FORRT) confirm authorship, publication details, and the core argument of the article. [tier=unverified indep_score=0.3 clusters=3 claim_tier=notable] [rescored 2026-09-15: curated origin-host map (PR #65); unclassified hosts no longer scored as aggregators]
Sources
- Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does ... (seed:psychology_and_neuroscience)
- https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Is-psychology-suffering-from-a-replication-crisis-Maxwell-Lau/44568dcd125eb2bd279290ded2cdedae0f089f47 (corroboration)
- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281621785_Is_Psychology_Suffering_From_a_Replication_Crisis_What_Does_Failure_to_Replicate_Really_Mean (corroboration)
- https://forrt.org/curated_resources/is-psychology-suffering-from-a-replicati/ (corroboration)