[From the working paper “Why Too Many Political Science Findings Cannot be Trusted and What We Can Do About It” by Alexander Wuttke, posted at SocArXiv Papers]

“…this article reviewed the meta-scientific evidence with a focus on the quantitative political science literature. The main result of these meta-scientific inquiries is that a significant portion of examined studies do not meet one or several credibility criteria. Specifically, by not providing data and method transparency, many or most political science studies make themselves inaccessible to inter-subjective validity assessments and when put to a test, the empirical findings of many studies cannot be verified. Moreover, findings in published and unpublished research diverge strongly and systematically and the published studies show evidence of substantial underreporting. Altogether, meta-scientific evidence indicates deficiencies in the credibility of political science studies and suggests that the body of published political science findings is not an unbiased representation of the entire evidence base…”

To read more, click here.