52% Yes, a signiicant crisis 3% No, there is no crisis 7% Don't know 38% Yes, a slight crisis 38% Yes, a slight crisis 1,576 RESEARCHERS SURVEYED M ore than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments. Those are some of the telling figures that emerged from Nature's survey of 1,576 researchers who took a brief online questionnaire on reproducibility in research. The data reveal sometimes-contradictory attitudes towards reproduc-ibility. Although 52% of those surveyed agree that there is a significant 'crisis' of reproducibility, less than 31% think that failure to reproduce published results means that the result is probably wrong, and most say that they still trust the published literature. Data on how much of the scientific literature is reproducible are rare and generally bleak. The best-known analyses, from psychology 1 and cancer biology 2 , found rates of around 40% and 10%, respectively. Our survey respondents were more optimistic: 73% said that they think that at least half of the papers in their field can be trusted, with physicists and chemists generally showing the most confidence. The results capture a confusing snapshot of attitudes around these issues, says Arturo Casadevall, a microbiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland. "At the current time there is no consensus on what reproducibility is or should be. " But just recognizing that is a step forward, he says. "The next step may be identifying what is the problem and to get a consensus. "

No abstract

These data are the first to show alterations in attentional bias for smoking-related stimuli following a modified visual probe training procedure. Furthermore, post-training group differences in subjective craving suggest potential clinical utility of training procedures, although these effects may operate only in males. Future research should investigate whether multiple training sessions enhance post-training reductions in craving and cue reactivity, and the longer-term persistence of training effects.

Our results support the presence of a small effect of a polymorphism in the serotonin transporter promoter on susceptibility to depression. However, we caution that it is possible that the effect has an artifactual basis, rather than a biological origin.

We recently demonstrated that alcohol elicits a difference between men and women in perceptual threshold for facial expressions of sadness. However, this study did not include a manipulation of alcohol expectancy. Therefore, we sought to determine whether these effects may be due to the expectation of having consumed alcohol. Male and female participants (n = 100) were randomised using a balanced-placebo design to receive either an alcoholic or a non-alcoholic drink and to be told that this was alcoholic or non-alcoholic. Participants completed a psychophysical task which presented male and female faces expressing angry, happy, and sad emotions. Analysis of threshold data indicated a significant two-way interaction of drink x target emotion, reflecting a higher threshold for the detection of sad facial expressions of emotion, compared with angry or happy expressions, in the alcohol condition compared with the placebo condition. We did not observe any evidence of sex differences in these effects. Our data indicate that alcohol modifies the perceptual threshold for facial expressions of sadness. Unlike our previous report, we did not observe evidence of sex differences in these effects. Most importantly, we did not observe any evidence that these effects were due to expectancy effects associated with alcohol consumption.