IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpgt/0502034.html

Publication Bias Against Null Results

Author

Listed:
  • Raymond Hubbard

    (College of Business & Public Administration, Duke University)

  • JS Armstrong

    (The Wharton School)

Abstract

Studies suggest a bias against the publication of null (p > .05) results. Instead of significance, we advocate reporting effect sizes and confidence intervals, and using replication studies. If statistical tests are used, power tests should accompany them.

Suggested Citation

  • Raymond Hubbard & JS Armstrong, 2005. "Publication Bias Against Null Results," General Economics and Teaching 0502034, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0502034
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/get/papers/0502/0502034.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. Murray Lindsay, 1994. "Publication System Biases Associated with the Statistical Testing Paradigm," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 33-57, June.
    2. Raymond Hubbard & JS Armstrong, 2005. "Replications and Extensions in Marketing – Rarely Published But Quite Contrary," General Economics and Teaching 0502051, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Hubbard, Raymond & Vetter, Daniel E., 1996. "An empirical comparison of published replication research in accounting, economics, finance, management, and marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 153-164, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Rakesh Sambharya & Martina Musteen, 2014. "Institutional environment and entrepreneurship: An empirical study across countries," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 314-330, December.
    3. Hensel, Przemysław G., 2019. "Supporting replication research in management journals: Qualitative analysis of editorials published between 1970 and 2015," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 45-57.
    4. Daniele Fanelli, 2012. "Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 891-904, March.
    5. Francisco J. Conejo & Lawrence F. Cunningham & Clifford E. Young, 2020. "Revisiting the Brand Luxury Index: new empirical evidence and future directions," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(1), pages 108-122, January.
    6. Ryan, James C. & A Tipu, Syed A., 2022. "Business and management research: Low instances of replication studies and a lack of author independence in replications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    7. JS Armstrong, 2005. "Quality Control Versus Innovation in Research on Marketing," General Economics and Teaching 0502050, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Jan A. Kempkes & Francesco Suprano & Andreas Wömpener, 2024. "How management support systems affect job performance: a systematic literature review and research agenda," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 2013-2086, December.
    9. Lindsay, R. Murray, 1995. "Reconsidering the status of tests of significance: An alternative criterion of adequacy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 35-53, January.
    10. Hardcopf, Rick & Liu, Gensheng (Jason) & Shah, Rachna, 2021. "Lean production and operational performance: The influence of organizational culture," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    11. Gassen, Joachim, 2014. "Causal inference in empirical archival financial accounting research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 535-544.
    12. Christian Klein & Bernhard Zwergel & J. Henning Fock, 2009. "Reconsidering the impact of national soccer results on the FTSE 100," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(25), pages 3287-3294.
    13. Armstrong, J. Scott & Fildes, Robert, 2006. "Making progress in forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 433-441.
    14. Mohammadi, Ali & Basir, Nada O. & Lööf, Hans, 2015. "CEO Duality and Firm Performance Revisited," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 400, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Evanschitzky, Heiner & Baumgarth, Carsten & Hubbard, Raymond & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2007. "Replication research's disturbing trend," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 411-415, April.
    18. Hensel, Przemysław G., 2021. "Reproducibility and replicability crisis: How management compares to psychology and economics – A systematic review of literature," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 577-594.
    19. Ho, Carol-Anne & Williams, S. Mitchell, 2003. "Reply to "International comparative analysis of the association between board structure and the efficiency of value added by a firm from its physical capital and intellectual capital resources: A discussion"," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 499-502.
    20. Stefania Veltri & Antonella Silvestri, 2020. "The value relevance of corporate financial and nonfinancial information provided by the integrated report: A systematic review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3038-3054, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • A - General Economics and Teaching

    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:wpa:wuwpgt:0502034. 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: EconWPA The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask EconWPA to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.