Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/161156
Authors: 
Mueller-Langer, Frank
Fecher, Benedikt
Harhoff, Dietmar
Wagner, Gert G.
Year of Publication: 
2017
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers 10533
Abstract: 
Replication studies are considered a hallmark of good scientific practice. Yet they are treated among researchers as an ideal to be professed but not practiced. To provide incentives and favorable boundary conditions for replication practice, the main stakeholders need to be aware of what drives replication. Here we investigate how often replication studies are published in empirical economics and what types of journal articles are replicated. We find that from 1974 to 2014 less than 0.1% of publications in the top-50 economics journals were replications. We do not find empirical support that mandatory data disclosure policies or the availability of data or code have a significant effect on the incidence of replication. The mere provision of data repositories may be ineffective, unless accompanied by appropriate incentives. However, we find that higher-impact articles and articles by authors from leading institutions are more likely to be subject of published replication studies whereas the replication probability is lower for articles published in higher-ranked journals.
Subjects: 
replication
economics of science
science policy
economic methodology
JEL: 
A1
B4
C12
C13
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
1.15 MB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.