Abstract
The low replication rate of published studies has long concerned the social science community, making understanding the replicability a critical problem. Several studies have shown that relevant research communities can make predictions about the replicability of individual studies with above-chance accuracy. Follow-up work further indicates that laypeople can also achieve above-chance accuracy in predicting replicability when experts interpret the studies into short descriptions that are more accessible for laypeople. The involvement of scarce expert resources may make these methods expensive from financial and time perspectives. In this work, we explored whether laypeople can predict the replicability of social science studies without expert intervention. We presented laypeople with raw materials truncated from published social science papers and elicited their answers to questions related to the paper. Our results suggested that laypeople were engaged in this technical task, providing reasonable and self-contained answers. The majority of them also demonstrated a good understanding of the material. However, the solicited information had limited predictive power on the actual replication outcomes. We further discuss several lessons we learned compared to the approach with expert intervention to inspire future works.