I&#x27;m not sure replicatable or reproducible are better or worse than each other. They are just different things. Replicatable seems to hint at an easy way to run quite literally the exact same experiment or process as someone else has done in the past, while reproducible suggests there is enough information made available for someone else to re-create from the ground up a previous experiment or process.<p>It seems to me both have merits and one cannot assume that performing a &#x27;replication&#x27; is a superior form of &#x27;reproduction&#x27;, nor the other way around. I suspect the merits and relative desirability of one or the other vary depending on discipline.