IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v7y2019i3p52-d249307.html

Rinse and Repeat: Understanding the Value of Replication across Different Ways of Knowing

Author

Listed:
  • Bart Penders

    (Department of Health, Ethics & Society, School of Primary Care and Public Health (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, PO Box 616, NL-6200MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands)

  • J. Britt Holbrook

    (Department of Humanities, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ 07102, USA)

  • Sarah de Rijcke

    (Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University, PO Box 905, NL-2300AX Leiden, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The increasing pursuit of replicable research and actual replication of research is a political project that articulates a very specific technology of accountability for science. This project was initiated in response to concerns about the openness and trustworthiness of science. Though applicable and valuable in many fields, here we argue that this value cannot be extended everywhere, since the epistemic content of fields, as well as their accountability infrastructures, differ. Furthermore, we argue that there are limits to replicability across all fields; but in some fields, including parts of the humanities, these limits severely undermine the value of replication to account for the value of research.

Suggested Citation

  • Bart Penders & J. Britt Holbrook & Sarah de Rijcke, 2019. "Rinse and Repeat: Understanding the Value of Replication across Different Ways of Knowing," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:7:y:2019:i:3:p:52-:d:249307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/3/52/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/3/52/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rik Peels & Lex Bouter, 2018. "Humanities need a replication drive too," Nature, Nature, vol. 558(7710), pages 372-372, June.
    2. Sarah de Rijcke & Bart Penders, 2018. "Resist calls for replicability in the humanities," Nature, Nature, vol. 560(7716), pages 29-29, August.
    3. Michael A. Clemens, 2017. "The Meaning Of Failed Replications: A Review And Proposal," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 326-342, February.
    4. Derksen, Maarten & Rietzschel, Eric F., 2013. "Surveillance Is Not the Answer, and Replication Is Not a Test: Comment on Kepes and McDaniel, “How Trustworthy Is the Scientific Literature in I–O Psychology?”," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 295-298, September.
    5. repec:nas:journl:v:115:y:2018:p:5042-5046 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Berna Devezer & Luis G Nardin & Bert Baumgaertner & Erkan Ozge Buzbas, 2019. "Scientific discovery in a model-centric framework: Reproducibility, innovation, and epistemic diversity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    7. Rik Peels & Lex Bouter, 2018. "The possibility and desirability of replication in the humanities," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-4, December.
    8. Francis S. Collins & Lawrence A. Tabak, 2014. "Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility," Nature, Nature, vol. 505(7485), pages 612-613, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. repec:osf:metaar:67sak_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Fanelli, Daniele, 2022. "The "Tau" of Science - How to Measure, Study, and Integrate Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge," MetaArXiv 67sak, Center for Open Science.
    3. Charlotte C. S. Rulkens & Rik Peels & Maartje Stols-Witlox & Sabrina Meloni & Iris M. Lechner & Lex Bouter, 2025. "The attribution of two portraits of Rembrandt revisited: a replication study in art history," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Fanelli, Daniele, 2020. "Metascientific reproducibility patterns revealed by informatic measure of knowledge," MetaArXiv 5vnhj, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aaron C Ericsson & J Wade Davis & William Spollen & Nathan Bivens & Scott Givan & Catherine E Hagan & Mark McIntosh & Craig L Franklin, 2015. "Effects of Vendor and Genetic Background on the Composition of the Fecal Microbiota of Inbred Mice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Klege, Rebecca A. & Amuakwa-Mensah, Franklin & Visser, Martine, 2022. "Tenancy and energy choices in Rwanda. A replication and extension study," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    3. İbrahim Özmen & Mihai Mutascu, 2024. "Public Debt and Growth: New Insights," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 8706-8736, June.
    4. repec:plo:pone00:0215221 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Luca Gerotto & Paolo Pellizzari, 2021. "A replication of Pindyck’s willingness to pay: on the efforts required to obtain results," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(5), pages 1-25, May.
    6. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2020. "Moral judgment of environmental harm caused by a single versus multiple wrongdoers: A survey experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    7. Bensch, Gunther & Gotz, Gunnar & Peters, Jörg, 2020. "Effects of rural electrification on employment: A comment on Dinkelman (2011)," Ruhr Economic Papers 840, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    8. Chowdhury, Rosen & Cook, Steve & Watson, Duncan, 2023. "Reconsidering the relationship between health and income in the UK," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    9. Christian Dippel & Michael Poyker, 2019. "How Common are Electoral Cycles in Criminal Sentencing?," NBER Working Papers 25716, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Bruns, Stephan B. & König, Johannes & Stern, David I., 2019. "Replication and robustness analysis of ‘energy and economic growth in the USA: A multivariate approach’," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 100-113.
    11. Naoyuki Hayashi & Kazuhiro Kezuka, 2020. "The influence of occupation on the longevity of Japanese traditional artists," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-6, December.
    12. Latré, Edwin & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter, 2017. "Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: The role of national context revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 124-133.
    13. Adesina, Adedoyin & Akogun, Oladele & Dillon, Andrew & Friedman, Jed & Njobdi, Sani & Serneels, Pieter, "undated". "Robustness and External Validity: What do we Learn from Repeated Study Designs over Time?," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 266292, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Isaiah Andrews & Maximilian Kasy, 2019. "Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2766-2794, August.
    15. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    16. Haller, Stefanie & Flaherty, Eoin T. & Balsvik, Ragnhild, 2023. "Knowledge Transfers from Multinational to Domestic Firms: Evidence from Worker Mobility. A Replication Study of Poole (Review of Economics and Statistics, 2013)," Journal of Comments and Replications in Economics (JCRE), ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 2, pages 1-30.
    17. James Derbyshire & Mandeep Dhami & Ian Belton & Dilek Önkal, 2023. "The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.
    18. Nick Huntington‐Klein & Andreu Arenas & Emily Beam & Marco Bertoni & Jeffrey R. Bloem & Pralhad Burli & Naibin Chen & Paul Grieco & Godwin Ekpe & Todd Pugatch & Martin Saavedra & Yaniv Stopnitzky, 2021. "The influence of hidden researcher decisions in applied microeconomics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 944-960, July.
    19. Jörg Ankel‐Peters & Nathan Fiala & Florian Neubauer, 2025. "Is economics self‐correcting? Replications in the American Economic Review," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 63(2), pages 463-485, April.
    20. Reed, W. Robert, 2019. "Takeaways from the special issue on The Practice of Replication," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 13, pages 1-11.
    21. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:7:y:2019:i:3:p:52-:d:249307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.