As the result of a mandate from Congress, the National Academies will explore the issues of reproducibility and replication in scientific and engineering research. The committee will explore what is known and identify areas that may need more information to ascertain the extent of reproducibility and replication, review current activities to improve reproducibility and replication highlighting examples of good practices, and examine factors that adversely affect reproducibility and replication.
While computational reproducibility in scientific research is generally expected when the original data and code are available, lack of ability to replicate a previous study — or obtain consistent results looking at the same scientific question but with different data — is more nuanced and occasionally can aid in the process of scientific discovery, says a new congressionally mandated report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science recommends ways that researchers, academic institutions, journals, and funders should help strengthen rigor and transparency in order to improve the reproducibility and replicability of scientific research.
One of the pathways by which the scientific community confirms the validity of a new scientific discovery is by repeating the research that produced it. When a scientific effort fails to independently confirm the computations or results of a previous study, some argue that such an observed inconsistency can be an important precursor to new discovery while others fear it may be a symptom of a lack of rigor in science. When a newly reported scientific study has far-reaching implications for science or a major, potential impact on the public, the question of its reliability takes on heightened importance.
https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/reproducibility-and-replicability-in-science