IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/econjl/v127y2017i605pf200-f208.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Research Reproducibility Crisis and Economics of Science

Author

Listed:
  • Zacharias Maniadis
  • Fabio Tufano

Abstract

To address the increasing concern about research reproducibility, cross‐fertilisation across economics and other disciplines is likely to have far‐reaching benefits. Our brief summary focuses on two areas in which a mutual investment in investigating possible cross‐disciplinary synergies could benefit the scientific endeavour as a whole. First, the discipline of economic design has much to contribute to the discussion of possible reforms in science. Second, the empirical methodology of meta‐research can inform practices to assess the validity of the economics literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Zacharias Maniadis & Fabio Tufano, 2017. "The Research Reproducibility Crisis and Economics of Science," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 200-208, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:econjl:v:127:y:2017:i:605:p:f200-f208
    DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12526
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12526
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ecoj.12526?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Javdani, Mohsen & Chang, Ha-Joon, 2019. "Who Said or What Said? Estimating Ideological Bias in Views Among Economists," IZA Discussion Papers 12738, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. 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.
    3. Mantas Radzvilas & Francesco De Pretis & William Peden & Daniele Tortoli & Barbara Osimani, 2023. "Incentives for Research Effort: An Evolutionary Model of Publication Markets with Double-Blind and Open Review," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 1433-1476, April.
    4. Stephen Fox, 2018. "Irresponsible Research and Innovation? Applying Findings from Neuroscience to Analysis of Unsustainable Hype Cycles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Silvia Angerer & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Matthias Sutter, 2021. "The effects of language on patience: an experimental replication study of the linguistic-savings hypothesis in Austria," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(1), pages 88-97, September.

    More about this item

    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:wly:econjl:v:127:y:2017:i:605:p:f200-f208. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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.