scholarly journals The Costs and Benefits of Replication Studies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Alvaro Coles ◽  
Leonid Tiokhin ◽  
Anne M. Scheel ◽  
Peder Mortvedt Isager ◽  
Daniel Lakens
Keyword(s):  
Decision Theory ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Replication Studies ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Replication Research ◽  
Theory Framework

In a summary of recent discussions about the role of direct replications in psychological science, Zwaan, Etz, Lucas, and Donnellan (2017; henceforth ZELD) argue that replications should be more mainstream, and discuss six common objections to direct replication studies. We believe that the debate about the importance of replication research is essentially driven by disagreements about the value of replication studies and the best way to allocate limited resources. We suggest that a decision theory framework (Wald, 1950) can provide a tool for researchers to (a) evaluate costs and benefits in order to determine when replication studies are worthwhile, and (b) specify their assumptions in quantifiable terms, facilitating more productive discussions in which the sources of disagreement about the value of replications can be identified.

scholarly journals The role of replication studies in ecology

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Fraser ◽  
Timothy H. Parker ◽  
Fiona Fidler ◽  
Ashley Barnett
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Ecological Studies ◽  
Median Response ◽  
Replication Studies

Recent large-scale projects in other disciplines have shown that results often fail to replicate when studies are repeated. The conditions contributing to this problem are also present in ecology but there have not been any equivalent replication projects. Here we examine ecologists’ understanding of and opinions about replication studies. When asked what percentage of ecological studies are replicated, the median response given by ecologists is 10%. The majority of ecologists in our sample considered replication studies to be important (97%), not prevalent enough (91%), worth funding even given limited resources (61%), and suitable for publication in all journals (62%). However, there is a disconnect between this enthusiasm and the prevalence of direct replication studies in the literature which, is much lower than our participants’ estimate of 10%. This may be explained by the obstacles our participants identified including the difficulty of conducting replication studies and of funding and publishing them. We conclude by offering suggestions for how replications could be better integrated into ecological research.

Addressing a Crisis of Generalizability with Large-Scale Construct Validation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Kay Flake ◽  
Mairead Shaw ◽  
Raymond Luong
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Construct Validation ◽  
Replication Studies ◽  
Descriptive Research ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Replication Research ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Validation Research

Yarkoni describes a grim state of psychological science in which the gross misspecification of our models and specificity of our operationalizations produce claims with generality so narrow that no one would be interested in them. We consider this a generalizability of construct validity issue and discuss how construct validation research should precede large-scale replication research. We provide ideas for a path forward by suggesting psychologists take a few steps back. By retooling large-scale replication studies, psychologists can execute the descriptive research needed to assess the generalizability of constructs. We provide examples of reusing large-scale replication data to conduct construct validation research post hoc. We also discuss proof of concept research that is on-going at the Psychological Science Accelerator. Big team psychology makes large-scale construct validity and generalizability research feasible and worthwhile. We assert that no one needs to quit the field, in fact, there is plenty of work to do. The optimistic interpretation is that if psychologists focus less on generating new ideas and more on organizing, synthesizing, measuring, and assessing constructs from existing ideas, we can keep busy for at least 100 years.

scholarly journals The costs and benefits of replication studies

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas A. Coles ◽  
Leonid Tiokhin ◽  
Anne M. Scheel ◽  
Peder M. Isager ◽  
Daniël Lakens
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Individual Decision ◽  
Individual Decision Making ◽  
Replication Studies

AbstractThe debate about whether replication studies should become mainstream is essentially driven by disagreements about their costs and benefits and the best ways to allocate limited resources. Determining when replications are worthwhile requires quantifying their expected utility. We argue that a formalized framework for such evaluations can be useful for both individual decision-making and collective discussions about replication.

Holding replication studies to mainstream standards of evidence

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duane T. Wegener ◽  
Leandre R. Fabrigar
Keyword(s):  
Replication Studies ◽  
Replication Research ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Do So

AbstractReplications can make theoretical contributions, but are unlikely to do so if their findings are open to multiple interpretations (especially violations of psychometric invariance). Thus, just as studies demonstrating novel effects are often expected to empirically evaluate competing explanations, replications should be held to similar standards. Unfortunately, this is rarely done, thereby undermining the value of replication research.

Hostile Takeovers and Anti-takeover Defenses in the Russian Corporate Market

2007 ◽  
pp. 70-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Demidova
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Hostile Takeovers ◽  
Russian Market ◽  
Takeover Defenses ◽  
The Cost ◽  
European Markets

This article analyzes definitions and the role of hostile takeovers at the Russian and European markets for corporate control. It develops the methodology of assessing the efficiency of anti-takeover defenses adapted to the conditions of the Russian market. The paper uses the cost-benefit analysis, where the costs and benefits of the pre-bid and post-bid defenses are compared.

The Ethics of Petroleum

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathon W. Moses ◽  
Bjørn Letnes
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Social Responsibility ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Host Country ◽  
Corporate Citizenship ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
Corporate Social ◽  
Oil Company

This chapter considers the role of international oil companies (IOCs) as global political actors with significant economic and political power. In doing so, we weigh the ethical costs and benefits for individuals, companies, and states alike. Using the concepts of “corporate social responsibility” (CSR) and “corporate citizenship” as points of departure, we consider the extent to which international oil companies have social and political responsibilities in the countries where they operate and what the host country can do to encourage this sort of behavior. We examine the nature of anticorruption legislation in several of the sending countries (including Norway), and look closely at how the Norwegian national oil company (NOC), Statoil, has navigated these ethical waters.

The Acceptance of Party Unity in Parliamentary Democracies

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Willumsen
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Parliamentary Democracies ◽  
Survey Questions ◽  
Ideal Policy ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Policy Incentives

The central argument of this book is that voting unity in European legislatures is not primarily the result of the ‘disciplining’ power of the leadership of parliamentary parties, but rather the result of a combination of ideological homogeneity through self-selection into political parties and the calculations of individual legislators about their own long-term benefits. Despite the central role of policy preferences in the subsequent behaviour of legislators, preferences at the level of the individual legislator have been almost entirely neglected in the study of parliaments and legislative behaviour. The book measures these using an until now under-utilized resource: parliamentary surveys. Building on these, the book develops measures of policy incentives of legislators to dissent from their parliamentary parties, and show that preference similarity amongst legislators explains a very substantial proportion of party unity, yet alone cannot explain all of it. Analysing the attitudes of legislators to the demands of party unity, and what drives these attitudes, the book argues that what explains the observed unity (beyond what preference similarity would explain) is the conscious acceptance by MPs that the long-term benefits of belonging to a united party (such as increased influence on legislation, lower transaction costs, and better chances of gaining office) outweigh the short-terms benefits of always voting for their ideal policy outcome. The book buttresses this argument through the analysis of both open-ended survey questions as well as survey questions on the costs and benefits of belonging to a political party in a legislature.

scholarly journals How Can Psychological Science Help Counter the Spread of Fake News?

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sander van der Linden ◽  
Jon Roozenbeek ◽  
Rakoen Maertens ◽  
Melisa Basol ◽  
Ondřej Kácha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Agenda ◽  
Source Credibility ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Intervention Effectiveness ◽  
Motivated Cognition ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
The Individual

Abstract In recent years, interest in the psychology of fake news has rapidly increased. We outline the various interventions within psychological science aimed at countering the spread of fake news and misinformation online, focusing primarily on corrective (debunking) and pre-emptive (prebunking) approaches. We also offer a research agenda of open questions within the field of psychological science that relate to how and why fake news spreads and how best to counter it: the longevity of intervention effectiveness; the role of sources and source credibility; whether the sharing of fake news is best explained by the motivated cognition or the inattention accounts; and the complexities of developing psychometrically validated instruments to measure how interventions affect susceptibility to fake news at the individual level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document