Sociologists study the impact religion has on child development

[Major Nikon]

36. No

Had you bothered to actually read the Nature article I reference you'd see they were talking about high quality studies published in reputable journals by highly respected academics. Even then the reproducibility rate was only 39%, not "50/50".

John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist at Stanford University in California, says that the true replication-failure rate could exceed 80%, even higher than Nosek's study suggests. This is because the Reproducibility Project targeted work in highly respected journals, the original scientists worked closely with the replicators, and replicating teams generally opted for papers employing relatively easy methods — all things that should have made replication easier.

So as far as a shit "study" published by a shit Chinese pseudo-science publishing factory by some obscure dude who had to include his even more obscure brother on the author list it seems reasonable to put the chances for reproducibility somewhere around a fart in a hurricane.

I reject this study because it's garbage and there's really no reason whatsoever to take it seriously.