Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
A Brief Guide to Evaluate Replications
by
Vanpaemel, Wolf
, Cheung, Irene
, Campbell, Lorne
, LeBel, Etienne Philippe
in
Data collection
/ Hypotheses
/ Open data
/ Quantitative psychology
/ Reproducibility
2019
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
A Brief Guide to Evaluate Replications
by
Vanpaemel, Wolf
, Cheung, Irene
, Campbell, Lorne
, LeBel, Etienne Philippe
in
Data collection
/ Hypotheses
/ Open data
/ Quantitative psychology
/ Reproducibility
2019
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
A Brief Guide to Evaluate Replications
2019
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
The importance of replication is becoming increasingly appreciated, however, considerably less consensus exists about how to evaluate the design and results of replications. We make concrete recommendations on how to evaluate replications with more nuance than what is typically done currently in the literature. We highlight six study characteristics that are crucial for evaluating replications: replication method similarity, replication differences, investigator independence, method/data transparency, analytic result reproducibility, and auxiliary hypotheses’ plausibility evidence. We also recommend a more nuanced approach to statistically interpret replication results at the individual-study and meta-analytic levels, and propose clearer language to communicate replication results.
Subject
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.