Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/307499 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2022
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] Management Review Quarterly [ISSN:] 2198-1639 [Volume:] 73 [Issue:] 3 [Publisher:] Springer International Publishing [Place:] Cham [Year:] 2022 [Pages:] 1109-1134
Verlag: 
Springer International Publishing, Cham
Zusammenfassung: 
Replication studies are important for the empirical research process. Yet, while there is an increased awareness of the need for replication in management research, it appears that such studies are rarely published in leading management journals. Importantly, we lack a comprehensive overview of replication studies in the top management journals that spans all sub-disciplines. Our systematic review closes this gap and provides an overview of the prevalence, types, outcomes, and impact of replication studies in management journals. We find that differences in the prevalence of replications between sub-disciplines exist and that most replications are wide replications. With regard to the replication outcome, our review shows that the share of non-confirming replications is low. Moreover, such replications are cited less often than confirming replications pointing towards a confirmation bias in management research. We discuss the implications of our results for authors, reviewers, and editors of management journals.
Schlagwörter: 
Replication
Independent replication
Systematic review
Impact
Empirical research
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Creative-Commons-Lizenz: 
cc-by Logo
Dokumentart: 
Article
Dokumentversion: 
Published Version

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.