The Design of Replicated Studies

Lindsay, Roger; Ehrenberg, A. S. C.

doi:10.1080/00031305.1993.10475983

Cited by 340 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

187

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Learning something new advances that goal; reaffirming something known does not. As Schmidt (2009) noted, "within the social sciences, only the discovery of a new fact is credited" (Schmidt, 2009, p. 95; see also Lindsay & Ehrenberg, 1993). Innovation-producing new ideas, methods, and evidence-is the basis for scientific advancement.…”

Section: Novelty and Positive Results Are Vital For Publishability Bumentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Utopia

Nosek

Spies

Motyl

2012

Perspect Psychol Sci

1,075

421

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An academic scientist's professional success depends on publishing. Publishing norms emphasize novel, positive results. As such, disciplinary incentives encourage design, analysis, and reporting decisions that elicit positive results and ignore negative results. Prior reports demonstrate how these incentives inflate the rate of false effects in published science. When incentives favor novelty over replication, false results persist in the literature unchallenged, reducing efficiency in knowledge accumulation. Previous suggestions to address this problem are unlikely to be effective. For example, a journal of negative results publishes otherwise unpublishable reports. This enshrines the low status of the journal and its content. The persistence of false findings can be meliorated with strategies that make the fundamental but abstract accuracy motive-getting it right-competitive with the more tangible and concrete incentive-getting it published. This article develops strategies for improving scientific practices and knowledge accumulation that account for ordinary human motivations and biases.

show abstract

Section: Novelty and Positive Results Are Vital For Publishability Bumentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Utopia

Nosek

Spies

Motyl

2012

Perspect Psychol Sci

1,075

421

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, constructive replications are undertaken to demonstrate the extent to which results hold across different methods, treatments, and occasions. In other words, constructive replication is a triangulation strategy designed to ascertain the generalizability of the results identified by successful close replication (Lindsay & Ehrenberg, 1993). Constructive replication, in which researchers vary the salient conditions, is a timehonored strategy for justifying claims about phenomena.…”

Section: A Model Of Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

An Abductive Theory of Scientific Method.

Haig

2005

Psychological Methods

265

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A broad theory of scientific method is sketched that has particular relevance for the behavioral sciences. This theory of method assembles a complex of specific strategies and methods that are used in the detection of empirical phenomena and the subsequent construction of explanatory theories. A characterization of the nature of phenomena is given, and the process of their detection is briefly described in terms of a multistage model of data analysis. The construction of explanatory theories is shown to involve their generation through abductive, or explanatory, reasoning, their development through analogical modeling, and their fuller appraisal in terms of judgments of the best of competing explanations. The nature and limits of this theory of method are discussed in the light of relevant developments in scientific methodology.Keywords: scientific method, phenomena detection, theory construction, abductive reasoning, research methodology[T]he attempt to understand and improve methods, and to do so via theorizing them, is at the center of an intelligently evolving cognition (Clifford Hooker, 1987, p. 291) This article is concerned with scientific method in the behavioral sciences. Its principal goal is to outline a broad theory of scientific method by making use of selected developments in contemporary research methodology. The time now seems right to intensify efforts to assemble knowledge of research methods into larger units of understanding. Currently, behavioral scientists use a plethora of specific research methods and a number of different investigative strategies when studying their domains of interest. Among this diversity, the well-known inductive and hypotheticodeductive accounts of scientific method have brought some order to our investigative practices. The former method speaks to the discovery of empirical generalizations, whereas the latter method is used to test hypotheses and theories in terms of their predictive success.However, although inductive and hypothetico-deductive methods are commonly regarded as the two main theories of scientific method (Laudan, 1981; and, in fact, are sometimes regarded as the principal claimants for the title of the definitive scientific method), they are better thought of as restrictive accounts of method that can be used to meet specific research goals (Nickles, 1987), not broad accounts of method that pursue a range of research goals. In fashioning empirical generalizations, the inductive method undoubtedly addresses an important part of scientific inquiry. However, it is a part only. Of equal importance is the process of theory construction. Here, however, the hypothetico-deductive method, with its focus on theory testing, speaks only to one, although important, part of the theory construction process (Simon, 1977).The theory of method outlined in this article is a broader account of scientific method than either the inductive or hypothetico-deductive theories of method. This more comprehensive theory of method endeavors to describe systematically how one ca...

show abstract

“…Literature reviews and analyses of existing data can be assigned to broad sections of the ladder, the precise positions depending upon the rigour of both the methods used and those of the contributing studies or data resources (Figure 2). Literature reviews are potentially far more valuable than any individual study owing to the accumulated mass of evidence, especially if comparable studies are performed under nonidentical conditions, helping to reveal how general the findings are over space and time (Lindsay and Ehrenberg, 1993).…”

Section: The Development Of Eco-hydromorphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating ecology with hydromorphology: a priority for river science and management

Vaughan¹,

Diamond²,

Gurnell³

et al. 2007

Aquatic Conservation

285

217

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT1. The assessment of links between ecology and physical habitat has become a major issue in river research and management. Key drivers include concerns about the conservation implications of human modifications (e.g. abstraction, climate change) and the explicit need to understand the ecological importance of hydromorphology as prescribed by the EU's Water Framework Directive. Efforts are focusing on the need to develop 'ecohydromorphology' at the interface between ecology, hydrology and fluvial geomorphology. Here, the scope of this emerging field is defined, some research and development issues are suggested, and a path for development is sketched out.2. In the short term, major research priorities are to use existing literature or data better to identify patterns among organisms, ecological functions and river hydromorphological character. Another early priority is to identify model systems or organisms to act as research foci. In the medium term, the investigation of patternprocesses linkages, spatial structuring, scaling relationships and system dynamics will advance mechanistic understanding. The effects of climate change, abstraction and river regulation, eco-hydromorphic resistance/ resilience, and responses to environmental disturbances are likely to be management priorities. Large-scale catchment projects, in both rural and urban locations, should be promoted to concentrate collaborative efforts, to attract financial support and to raise the profile of eco-hydromorphology.3. Eco-hydromorphological expertise is currently fragmented across the main contributory disciplines (ecology, hydrology, geomorphology, flood risk management, civil engineering), potentially restricting research and development. This is paradoxical given the shared vision across these fields for effective river management based on good science with social impact. A range of approaches is advocated to build sufficient, integrated capacity that will deliver science of real management value over the coming decades.

show abstract

The Design of Replicated Studies

Cited by 340 publications

References 28 publications

Scientific Utopia

Scientific Utopia

An Abductive Theory of Scientific Method.

Integrating ecology with hydromorphology: a priority for river science and management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About