The Replication Network
Furthering the Practice of Replication in Economics
Archives
When Peer Review is Too Slow – How About a Red Team?
[Excerpts taken from the article, “Pandemic researchers — recruit your own best critics” by Daniël Lakens, published in Nature] “As researchers rush to find the best ways to quell the COVID-19 crisis, they want to get results out ultra-fast. Preprints…
Read MoreAssessing the Peer Reviewers’ Openness (PRO) Initiative from the Perspective of PRO Signatories
[Excerpts taken from the preprint “’Because it is the Right Thing to Do’: Taking Stock of the Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative” by Maike Dahrendorf et al., posted at PsyArXiv Preprints] “Although the practice of publicly sharing data and code appears…
Read MoreDon’t Like the Author’s Conclusion? Read the Other One.
[From the article “Reproducibility trial publishes two conclusions for one paper” by David Adam, published in Nature] “How deeply an anaesthetist should sedate an elderly person when they have surgery is a controversial issue, because some studies link stronger doses…
Read MoreDoes Peer Review Ensure Scientific Integrity? Should it? Can it?
[From the article “The changing forms and expectations of peer review” by Serge Horbach and Willem Halffman, published in Research Integrity and Peer Review, 2018, 3:8] This is a wonderful article that provides a comprehensive discussion of peer review in…
Read MoreIN THE NEWS: Mother Jones (September 25, 2018)
[From the article, “This Cornell Food Researcher Has Had 13 Papers Retracted. How Were They Published in the First Place?” by Kiera Butler, published in Mother Jones] “In 2015, I wrote a profile of Brian Wansink, a Cornell University behavioral science researcher who…
Read MoreAt the Journal Nature, Peer Reviewers Have the Right To…
[From an editorial published in Nature entitled, “Referees should exercise their rights”] “At Nature, we recognize that our peer reviewers have certain ‘rights’. One of the most well known is the right to anonymity. Less widely known is that referees have the…
Read MoreREED: How “Open Science” Can Discourage Good Science, And What Journals Can Do About It
In a recent tweet (or series of tweets) Kaitlyn Werner shares her experience of having a paper rejected after she posted all her data and code and submitted her paper to a journal. The journal rejected the paper because a…
Read MorePeer Review Has Low Power: Act Surprised
[From the article “Peer review post-mortem: how a flawed aging study was published in Nature“, posted at the website, nrc.nl] “How could an article with numerous shortcomings be published in top-tier journal Nature? Hester van Santen reveals how the gate-keepers of…
Read MoreBOB REED: Replications and Peer Review
“Weekend Reads”, the weekly summary by IVAN ORANSKY of Retraction Watch, recently listed two articles on Peer Review. One, a blog by George Borjas, concerns the recent imbroglio at the American Economic Review involving an editor who oversaw the review of…
Read MoreChanging the World, One Peer Review at a Time
A new initiative calls for journal reviewers to ask editors to request authors to provide data and supporting code/documentation before they agree to review the manuscript. From The Peer Reviewers Openness Initiative: “We suggest that … reviewers make open practices a pre-condition…
Read More
The Replication Network 
You must be logged in to post a comment.