Ethics, Scandals and Self-Correction: My Predictions for Reproducibility in 2018

What’s going to happen in the reproducibility world in 2018? What are the new trends to push transparency, especially in the social sciences? And most importantly, what’s the next big challenge to be tackled? Here are my top predictions, collected with the help of reproducibility folks on twitter.

Advertisement

Hi-tech against scientific misconduct + gender bias

The Guardian published a long read piece today on attempts to detect data errors or fabrication on a large scale. Using the app Statcheck by Michele Nuijten, we can now detect automatically if papers may have errors in them. Unfortunately Michele is hardly mentioned in the article and does not become a vital part of the larger story. Gender bias?

Paper on measuring terrorism using replication data

An exciting paper at ISA’s 55th Annual Convention in Toronto tackles the challenge to find alternative operationalizations of terrorism using replication data. Join the disussion on Thursday, March 27, 2014 (10.30am).

Replication in International Relations: Successes & Failures in Practice

The largest International Relations conference, ISA’s 55th Annual Convention (March 26-29, 2014), features two panels on replication and reproducibility this year. The second panel covers “Replication in International Relations: Successes & Failures in Practice.”

Reblog: Replication in political science graduate courses: an untapped resource?

A post I published with Seth Werfel and Stephanie Wykstra on The Monkey Cage blog discusses survey results about replication projects assigned in graduate courses.

New ethics guidelines for data Access & research transparency

The current issue of PS: Political Science & Politics (Vol 47, Issue 1) is devoted to reproducibility, replication and data access. In eight articles, political scientists discuss the need for better quality standards in qualitative and quantitative research. This blog will publish a series of posts on the main points, starting with observations on the current state of reproducibility by Arthur Lupia and Colin Elman.

Yale psychology lab retracts papers after failed self-replication

The Retraction Watch blog just published a story of a “scientist doing the right thing at significant professional cost”: Yale’s Laurie Santos could not replicate her own papers, and decided to request a retraction by the journals.

Can the replication movement be harmful: The discussion continues

I recently wrote a piece reacting to Mina Bissell’s article on the risks of the replication drive. Now that American statistician and political scientist Andrew Gelman blogged about the topic, the discussion continues. According to Gelman, “the push for replication is so strong that now there’s a backlash against it”.