Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The Desperate Need for Replications

Contents:

Author Info

  • Hunter, John E
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    An overemphasis on creativity for evaluating research has lead to a serious devaluation of replication studies. However, we need a total sample size of N = 153,669 to estimate a causal effect to two digits, which is quite rare for a single study. The only way to get accurate estimation is to average across replications. If the average sample size were as high as N = 200, we would need over 700 replication studies. Scientific replications are more problematic than pure statistical replications, and so we need even more replications to achieve reasonable accuracy. Copyright 2001 by the University of Chicago.

    Download Info

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.

    Volume (Year): 28 (2001)
    Issue (Month): 1 (June)
    Pages: 149-58

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:v:28:y:2001:i:1:p:149-58

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JCR/

    Related research

    Keywords:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Evanschitzky, Heiner & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2010. "Replications of forecasting research," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 4-8, January.
    2. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2007. "Replication in Economics," NBER Working Papers 13026, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Walsh, Gianfranco & Shiu, Edward & Hassan, Louise M., 2014. "Replicating, validating, and reducing the length of the consumer perceived value scale," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 260-267.
    4. Hubbard, Raymond & Lindsay, R. Murray, 2013. "From significant difference to significant sameness: Proposing a paradigm shift in business research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1377-1388.
    5. Auh, Seigyoung & Johnson, Michael D., 2005. "Compatibility effects in evaluations of satisfaction and loyalty," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 35-57, February.
    6. Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano & John A. List, 2014. "One Swallow Doesn't Make a Summer: New Evidence on Anchoring Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(1), pages 277-90, January.
    7. Watson, Verity & Ryan, Mandy, 2007. "Exploring preference anomalies in double bounded contingent valuation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 463-482, May.
    8. Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano & John A List, 2013. "One Swallow Doesn’t Make a Summer: New Evidence on Anchoring Effects," Discussion Papers 2013-07, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    9. Walsh, Gianfranco & Beatty, Sharon E. & Shiu, Edward M.K., 2009. "The customer-based corporate reputation scale: Replication and short form," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 924-930, October.
    10. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List, 2013. "On the Generalizability of Experimental Results in Economics: With a Response to Commentors," CESifo Working Paper Series 4543, CESifo Group Munich.
    11. Evanschitzky, Heiner & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2013. "Research with In-built replications: Comment and further suggestions for replication research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1406-1408.
    12. Peterson, Robert A. & Merunka, Dwight R., 2014. "Convenience samples of college students and research reproducibility," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 1035-1041.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:v:28:y:2001:i:1:p:149-58. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.