Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Replications in Context: A Framework for Evaluating New Methods in Quantitative Political Science

  • Jeffrey J. Harden (a1), Anand E. Sokhey (a2) and Hannah Wilson (a3)
  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Replications in Context: A Framework for Evaluating New Methods in Quantitative Political Science
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Replications in Context: A Framework for Evaluating New Methods in Quantitative Political Science
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Replications in Context: A Framework for Evaluating New Methods in Quantitative Political Science
      Available formats
      ×

Abstract

Copyright

Corresponding author

Footnotes

Hide All

Authors’ note: The example presented here was documented in a preanalysis plan deposited at the Political Science Registered Studies Dataverse (doi:10.7910/DVN/J7HFRX) prior to execution. All replication materials are available at the Political Analysis Dataverse (Harden, Sokhey, and Wilson 2018). Author names appear in alphabetical order. We thank Justin Kirkland and Carlisle Rainey for helpful comments.

Contributing Editor: Jeff Gill

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Bednarski, Tadeusz. 1993. Robust estimation in Cox’s regression model. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 20(3):213225.
Berinsky, Adam, Druckman, James N., and Yamamoto, Teppei. 2018. Why replications do not fix the reproducibility crisis: A model and evidence from a large-scale vignette experiment. Paper presented at the 5th Annual Asian Political Methodology Meeting, Seoul, South Korea.
Carsey, Thomas M. 2014. Making DA-RT a reality. PS: Political Science & Politics 47(1):7277.
Cox, David R. 1975. Partial likelihood. Biometrika 62(2):269276.
Desmarais, Bruce A., and Harden, Jeffrey J.. 2012. Comparing partial likelihood and robust estimation methods for the Cox regression model. Political Analysis 20(1):113135.
Gerring, John, and Cojocaru, Lee. 2016. Selecting cases for intensive analysis: A diversity of goals and methods. Sociological Methods & Research 45(3):392423.
Gill, Jeff. 1999. The insignificance of null hypothesis significance testing. Political Research Quarterly 52(3):647674.
Harden, Jeffrey J., Sokhey, Anand E., and Wilson, Hannah. 2018. Replication data for: Replications in context: A framework for evaluating new methods in quantitative political science, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ADJWFS, Harvard Dataverse, V1.
Ishiyama, John. 2014. Replication, research transparency, and journal publications: Individualism, community models, and the future of replication studies. PS: Political Science & Politics 47(1):7883.
King, Gary. 1995. Replication, replication. PS: Political Science & Politics 28(3):444452.
Monogan, James E. 2013. A case for registering studies of political outcomes: An application in the 2010 House elections. Political Analysis 21(1):2137.
Rainey, Carlisle. 2014. Arguing for a negligible effect. American Journal of Political Science 58(4):10831091.
Rubin, Donald B. 1981. The Bayesian bootstrap. The Annals of Statistics 9(1):130134.
MathJax
MathJax is a JavaScript display engine for mathematics. For more information see http://www.mathjax.org.

Keywords

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Harden et al. supplementary material
Harden et al. supplementary material 1

 Unknown (186 KB)
186 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed