The Replication Network
Furthering the Practice of Replication in Economics
Archives
Pre-Registration: It’s a Journey
[Excerpts taken from the preprint “Preregistration Is Hard, And Worthwhile” by Brian Nosek and others, posted at PsyArXiv Preprints] “Preregistration of studies serves at least three aims for improving the credibility and reproducibility of research findings.” “First, preregistration of analysis…
Read MoreIN THE NEWS: Psychology Today (June 28, 2019)
[From the article “Second-Guessing Predictions: When to trust scientific predictions—and when to ignore them” by Alexander Danvers] “One of the key reforms of the Credibility Revolution in psychology research is the use of preregistration: Scientists write down what they predict will happen…
Read MoreGOODMAN & REED: A Friendly Debate about Pre-Registration
Background: Nat Goodman is generally pessimistic about the benefits of pre-registration. Bob Reed is generally optimistic about pre-registration. What follows is a back-and-forth dialogue about what each likes and dislikes about pre-registration. [GOODMAN, Opening Statement] We need to remember that…
Read MoreIn Two Decades, Will We Look Back And Wonder At All the Flawed Research?
[From the article, “Rein in the four horsemen of irreproducibility”, by Dorothy Bishop, published in Nature] “More than four decades into my scientific career, I find myself an outlier among academics of similar age and seniority: I strongly identify with…
Read MoreBattle of the p-Hackers: The HARKer Versus The Accumulator
[From the blog, “Gazing into the Abyss of P-Hacking: HARKing vs. Optional Stopping” by Angelika Stefan and Felix Schönbrodt, posted at Felix Schönbrodt’s website at http://www.nicebread.de%5D “Now, what does a researcher do when confronted with messy, non-significant results? According to several…
Read MoreThings Aren’t Looking That Great in Ecology and Evolution Either
[From a recent working paper entitled “Questionable Research Practices in Ecology and Evolution” by Hannah Fraser, Tim Parker, Shinichi Nakagawa, Ashley Barnett, and Fiona Fidler] “We surveyed 807 researchers (494 ecologists and 313 evolutionary biologists) about their use of Questionable…
Read MoreMURPHY: Quantifying the Role of Research Misconduct in the Failure to Replicate
[NOTE: This blog is based on the article “HARKing: How Badly Can Cherry-Picking and Question Trolling Produce Bias in Published Results?” by Kevin Murphy and Herman Aguinis, recently published in the Journal of Business and Psychology.] The track record for…
Read MoreHARKing is Bad, But Which Kind of HARKing is Worse?
[From the article “HARKing: How Badly Can Cherry-Picking and Question Trolling Produce Bias in Published Results?” by Kevin Murphy and Herman Aguinis, published in the Journal of Business and Psychology.] “The practice of hypothesizing after results are known (HARKing) has…
Read More
The Replication Network 