IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v36y2007i2p153-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Replication Standards for Quantitative Social Science

Author

Listed:
  • Jeremy Freese

    (Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, jfreese@northwestern.edu)

Abstract

The credibility of quantitative social science benefits from policies that increase confidence that results reported by one researcher can be verified by others. Concerns about replicability have increased as the scale and sophistication of analyses increase the possible dependence of results on subtle analytic decisions and decrease the extent to which published articles contain full descriptions of methods. The author argues that sociology should adopt standards regarding replication that minimize its conceptualization as an ethical and individualistic matter and advocates for a policy in which authors use independent online archives to deposit the maximum possible information for replicating published results at the time of publication and are explicit about the conditions of availability for any necessary materials that are not provided. The author responds to several objections that might be raised to increasing the transparency of quantitative sociology in this way and offers a candidate replication policy for sociology.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeremy Freese, 2007. "Replication Standards for Quantitative Social Science," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 36(2), pages 153-172, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:36:y:2007:i:2:p:153-172
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124107306659
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124107306659
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124107306659?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dewald, William G & Thursby, Jerry G & Anderson, Richard G, 1986. "Replication in Empirical Economics: The Journal of Money, Credit and Banking Project," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 587-603, September.
    2. B. D. McCullough & H. D. Vinod, 2003. "Verifying the Solution from a Nonlinear Solver: A Case Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 873-892, June.
    3. McCullough, B. D. & McGeary, Kerry Anne & Harrison, Teresa D., 2006. "Lessons from the JMCB Archive," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(4), pages 1093-1107, June.
    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. Diekmann Andreas, 2011. "Are Most Published Research Findings False?," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 231(5-6), pages 628-635, October.
    2. Alexander Kindel & Vineet Bansal & Kristin Catena & Thomas Hartshorne & Kate Jaeger, 2018. "Improving metadata infrastructure for complex surveys: 
Insights from the Fragile Families Challenge," Working Papers wp18-10-ff, Princeton University, School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Research on Child Wellbeing..

    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. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick, 2018. "Open access to research data: Strategic delay and the ambiguous welfare effects of mandatory data disclosure," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 20-34.
    2. Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick & Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2014. "Open access to data: An ideal professed but not practised," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1621-1633.
    3. Mark J. McCabe & Frank Mueller-Langer, 2019. "Does Data Disclosure Increase Citations? Empirical Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Leading Economics Journals," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2019-02, Joint Research Centre.
    4. Maren Duvendack & Richard W. Palmer-Jones & W. Robert Reed, 2015. "Replications in Economics: A Progress Report," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 12(2), pages 164–191-1, May.
    5. Michal Krawczyk & Ernesto Reuben, 2012. "(Un)Available upon Request: Field Experiment on Researchers' Willingness to Share Supplementary Materials," Natural Field Experiments 00689, The Field Experiments Website.
    6. Charles G. Renfro, 2009. "The Practice of Econometric Theory," Advanced Studies in Theoretical and Applied Econometrics, Springer, number 978-3-540-75571-5, July-Dece.
    7. Horton, Joanne & Krishna Kumar, Dhanya & Wood, Anthony, 2020. "Detecting academic fraud using Benford law: The case of Professor James Hunton," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    8. Vlaeminck, Sven & Herrmann, Lisa-Kristin, 2015. "Data Policies and Data Archives: A New Paradigm for Academic Publishing in Economic Sciences?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 145-155.
    9. Maren Duvendack & Richard Palmer-Jones, 2013. "Replication of quantitative work in development studies: Experiences and suggestions," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 13(4), pages 307-322, October.
    10. Vlaeminck, Sven, 2013. "Data Management in Scholarly Journals and Possible Roles for Libraries - Some Insights from EDaWaX," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 23(1), pages 49-79.
    11. 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.
    12. Robert A. Moffitt, 2011. "Report of the Editor: American Economic Review (with Appendix by Philip J. Glandon)," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 684-693, May.
    13. 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.
    14. Kleiber Christian & Zeileis Achim, 2010. "The Grunfeld Data at 50," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 11(4), pages 404-417, December.
    15. 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.
    16. McCullough, B. D., 2018. "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Despite evidence to the contrary, the American Economic Review concluded that all was well with its archive," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 12, pages 1-13.
    17. Qianwei Ying & Tahir Yousaf & Qurat ul Ain & Yasmeen Akhtar & Muhammad Shahid Rasheed, 2019. "Stock Investment and Excess Returns: A Critical Review in the Light of the Efficient Market Hypothesis," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-22, June.
    18. Christophe Pérignon & Olivier Akmansoy & Christophe Hurlin & Anna Dreber & Felix Holzmeister & Juergen Huber & Magnus Johanneson & Michael Kirchler & Albert Menkveld & Michael Razen & Utz Weitzel, 2022. "Reproducibility of Empirical Results: Evidence from 1,000 Tests in Finance," Working Papers hal-03810013, HAL.
    19. Nicolas Vallois & Dorian Jullien, 2017. "Replication in experimental economics: A historical and quantitative approach focused on public good game experiments," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01651080, HAL.
    20. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2007. "Viewpoint: Replication in economics," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(3), pages 715-733, August.

    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:sae:somere:v:36:y:2007:i:2:p:153-172. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.