Tag Archives: methods

Replication in international relations: New research and blog

Nils Petter Gledisch and I just published a guest blog post about replication in international relations at the OUP blog. The blog is based on new research in the field, which we published as a symposium in International Studies Perspectives. We negotiated with OUP that all seven articles will be free access for a few weeks. Make sure to download all the pdfs before they go behind paywall again.

Continue reading

Tagged , ,

Reproducibility Pioneers: Political Scientists Assigning Replications to Students

Here are innovative and exciting syllabi of methods courses assigning replication studies to students. The instructors ensure that we build up a cohort of students who value reproducibility, while learning statistics at the same time.
Continue reading

Tagged , , , , ,

Academic slugfest & replication chains: getting replicated hurts

Screen Shot 2013-03-08 at 6.28.24 PMGetting replicated gives you citations, but it hurts. Often, authors respond with a paper to defend their earlier work. They often claim the replication was: fundamentally flawed, contains statistical and reporting errors, is of trivial nature, or less realistic and of limited utility. Such replication chains are not just entertaining academic slugfest, but they are useful because they provide discussions about data and methods.
Continue reading

Tagged , , , , ,

Replication chains: Political tolerance taken apart

Screen Shot 2013-03-08 at 6.28.24 PMHow would you like it if someone replicated your paper? Will it help you, and give you more citations, or will it cause rage? Some authors defend their original work against replication by writing an ‘answer’ paper, and they might claim that the replication was fundamentally flawed or contained statistical and reporting errors. Here’s another interesting replication chain.
Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Academic slugfest: the wonderful world of replication chains

Screen Shot 2013-03-08 at 6.28.24 PMSometimes an author, when being replicated by someone, answers to that replication in a new paper. In that new paper (s)he again might replicate some of the disputed results. Most authors defend their earlier paper by claiming that the replication was: fundamentally flawed, contains statistical and reporting errors, is of trivial nature, or less realistic and of limited utility. Such replication chains are not just entertaining academic slugfest, but they are useful because they provide detailed discussions about data and methods in the field.
Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Replication as a master thesis: “Unfortunately, most students shy away from this”

bad-apple
I recently wrote about a student who was awarded a Masters degree for her replication study at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Political scientist Jonathon W. Moses, who supervised the thesis, explains why more students should dare to replicate articles for a degree.
Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , ,