Abstract
Background
The replicability of sports and exercise research has not been assessed previously despite concerns about scientific practices within the field.
Aim
This study aims to provide an initial estimate of the replicability of applied sports and exercise science research published in quartile 1 journals (SCImago journal ranking for 2019 in the Sports Science subject category; www.scimagojr.com) between 2016 and 2021.
Methods
A formalised selection protocol for this replication project was previously published. Voluntary collaborators were recruited, and studies were allocated in a stratified and randomised manner on the basis of equipment and expertise. Original authors were contacted to provide deidentified raw data, to review preregistrations and to provide methodological clarifications. A multiple inferential strategy was employed to analyse the replication data. The same analysis (i.e. F test or t test) was used to determine whether the replication effect size was statistically significant and in the same direction as the original effect size. Z-tests were used to determine whether the original and replication effect size estimates were compatible or significantly different in magnitude.
Results
In total, 25 replication studies were included for analysis. Of the 25, 10 replications used paired t tests, 1 used an independent t test and 14 used an analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the statistical analyses. In all, 7 (28%) studies demonstrated robust replicability, meeting all three validation criteria: achieving statistical significance (p < 0.05) in the same direction as the original study and showing compatible effect size magnitudes as per the Z test (p > 0.05).
Conclusion
There was a substantial decrease in the published effect size estimate magnitudes when replicated; therefore, sports and exercise science researchers should consider effect size uncertainty when conducting subsequent power analyses. Additionally, there were many barriers to conducting the replication studies, e.g., original author communication and poor data and reporting transparency.
The replicability of sports and exercise research has not been assessed previously despite concerns about scientific practices within the field.
Aim
This study aims to provide an initial estimate of the replicability of applied sports and exercise science research published in quartile 1 journals (SCImago journal ranking for 2019 in the Sports Science subject category; www.scimagojr.com) between 2016 and 2021.
Methods
A formalised selection protocol for this replication project was previously published. Voluntary collaborators were recruited, and studies were allocated in a stratified and randomised manner on the basis of equipment and expertise. Original authors were contacted to provide deidentified raw data, to review preregistrations and to provide methodological clarifications. A multiple inferential strategy was employed to analyse the replication data. The same analysis (i.e. F test or t test) was used to determine whether the replication effect size was statistically significant and in the same direction as the original effect size. Z-tests were used to determine whether the original and replication effect size estimates were compatible or significantly different in magnitude.
Results
In total, 25 replication studies were included for analysis. Of the 25, 10 replications used paired t tests, 1 used an independent t test and 14 used an analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the statistical analyses. In all, 7 (28%) studies demonstrated robust replicability, meeting all three validation criteria: achieving statistical significance (p < 0.05) in the same direction as the original study and showing compatible effect size magnitudes as per the Z test (p > 0.05).
Conclusion
There was a substantial decrease in the published effect size estimate magnitudes when replicated; therefore, sports and exercise science researchers should consider effect size uncertainty when conducting subsequent power analyses. Additionally, there were many barriers to conducting the replication studies, e.g., original author communication and poor data and reporting transparency.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Sports Medicine |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 2025 |