The journal Epidemiology has refused to support transparency guidelines. In its editorial it gives the reason: research transparency hinders novelty and creativity.
Guest Post: I asked Nate Breznau, an empirical sociologist, to write about his experience replicating published work – the challenges, benefits, and how he got published.
A Princeton course instructor assigned replications to his students. Here’s his recap and advice to other teachers:
Originally posted on Wheels on the bus:
This semester I taught the second course in my department’s quantitative methods sequence that is required for all of our graduate students: Advanced Data Analysis for the Social Science. Sociology departments around the country all have a pretty similar required sequence. In teaching the course this time, I tried to modernize it so that it would train students for the future (not just the present or the past).
One big aspect of this modernization was requiring students to complete a project where they replicate and extend an already published paper. Overall, this change was a big success, and I’d recommend that other classes also try it. In this post, I’ll share some of what worked about the project and how I will do it better next time. I’ve also made all of the materials that we’ve used available on the class website.
View original 951 more words
When a study fails to replicate in political science, retractions are not very common. Often, the re-analysis that questions the original findings is published in the same or another journal; and then the original author sometimes writes a third article defending his/her findings (see here). Recently, a failed replication made it into the news, and suddenly there’s a ‘scandal.’ Here are the most important pieces you should read if you want to know the details.
I received this email from a journal editor in political science after I asked about their replication policy. My original email is below.