Many Labs 5:Testing pre-data collection peer review as an intervention to increase replicability

Replication studies in psychological science sometimes fail to reproduce prior findings. If these studies use methods that are unfaithful to the original study or ineffective in eliciting the phenomenon of interest, then a failure to replicate may be a failure of the protocol rather than a challenge to the original finding. Formal pre-data-collection peer review by experts may address shortcomings and increase replicability rates. We selected 10 replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P; Open Science Collaboration, 2015) for which the original authors had expressed concerns about the replication designs before data collection; only one of these studies had yielded a statistically significant effect (p < .05). Commenters suggested that lack of adherence to expert review and low-powered tests were the reasons that most of these RP:P studies failed to replicate the original effects. We revised the replication protocols and received formal peer review prior to conducting new replication studies. We administered the RP:P and revised protocols in multiple laboratories (median number of laboratories per original study = 6.5, range = 3?9; median total sample = 1,279.5, range = 276?3,512) for high-powered tests of each original finding with both protocols. Overall, following the preregistered analysis plan, we found that the revised protocols produced effect sizes similar to those of the RP:P protocols (?r = .002 or .014, depending on analytic approach). The median effect size for the revised protocols (r = .05) was similar to that of the RP:P protocols (r = .04) and the original RP:P replications (r = .11), and smaller than that of the original studies (r = .37). Analysis of the cumulative evidence across the original studies and the corresponding three replication attempts provided very precise estimates of the 10 tested effects and indicated that their effect sizes (median r = .07, range = .00?.15) were 78% smaller, on average, than the original effect sizes (median r = .37, range = .19?.50)

Near surface swimming of Salmonella Typhimurium explains target-site selection and cooperative invasion

Targeting of permissive entry sites is crucial for bacterial infection. The targeting mechanisms are incompletely understood. We have analyzed target-site selection by S. Typhimurium. This enteropathogenic bacterium employs adhesins (e.g. fim) and the type III secretion system 1 (TTSS-1) for host cell binding, the triggering of ruffles and invasion. Typically, S. Typhimurium invasion is focused on a subset of cells and multiple bacteria invade via the same ruffle. It has remained unclear how this is achieved. We have studied target-site selection in tissue culture by time lapse microscopy, movement pattern analysis and modeling. Flagellar motility (but not chemotaxis) was required for reaching the host cell surface in vitro. Subsequently, physical forces trapped the pathogen for ∼1.5-3 s in "near surface swimming". This increased the local pathogen density and facilitated "scanning" of the host surface topology. We observed transient TTSS-1 and fim-independent "stopping" and irreversible TTSS-1-mediated docking, in particular at sites of prominent topology, i.e. the base of rounded-up cells and membrane ruffles. Our data indicate that target site selection and the cooperative infection of membrane ruffles are attributable to near surface swimming. This mechanism might be of general importance for understanding infection by flagellated bacteria