Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-9hjnw Total loading time: 0.281 Render date: 2022-07-05T06:43:46.065Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true
  • English
PS: Political Science & Politics PS: Political Science & Politics

Article contents

Replication, Replication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Gary King
Gary King
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Extract

Political science is a community enterprise; the community of empirical political scientists needs access to the body of data necessary to replicate existing studies to understand, evaluate, and especially build on this work. Unfortunately, the norms we have in place now do not encourage, or in some cases even permit, this aim. Following are suggestions that would facilitate replication and are easy to implement—by teachers, students, dissertation writers, graduate programs, authors, reviewers, funding agencies, and journal and book editors.

Type
Verification/Replication
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , September 1995 , pp. 444 - 452
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boruch, Robert F., and Cordray, David S. 1985. “Professional Codes and Guidelines in Data Sharing.” In Sharing Research Data, Fienberg, Stephen E., Martin, Margaret E., and Straf, Miron L., eds., 199–223. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Ceci, Stephen, and Walker, Elaine. 1983. “Private Archives and Public Needs,” American Psychologist 38 (April):414–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewald, William G.,Thursby, Jerry G., and Anderson, Richard G. 1986. “Replication in Empirical Economics: The Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Project,” American Economic Review 76, 4 (September):587–603.Google Scholar
Diamond, A. M. Jr., 1988. “The Polywater Episode and the Appraisal of Theories.” In Scrutinizing Science, Donovan, A. et al. , eds. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Feigenbaum, Susan, and Levy, David M. 1993. “The Market for (Ir)reproducible Econometrics (with comments and response),” Social Epistemology 7, 3 (July-September):215–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fienberg, Stephen E., Martin, Margaret E., and Straf, Miron L., eds., Sharing Research Data. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Griffin, Larry, and Ragin, Charles C. 1994. “Formal Methods of Qualitative Analysis,” a special issue of Sociological Methods and Research 23, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, David P. 1991. “Research Papers: Who's Unrefd Now?” Science, 4 January, p. 25.Google ScholarPubMed
King, Gary. 1991. “On Political Methodology,” Political Analysis 2: pp. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary,Bruce, John M., and Gilligan, Michael. 1993. “The Science of Political Science Graduate Admissions,” PS: Political Science & Politics 4 (December):772–78.Google Scholar
King, Gary,Keohane, Robert O., and Verba, Sidney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Leimer, D. R., and Lesnoy, S. D. 1982. “Social Security and Private Saving,” Journal of Political Economy 90:606–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuliep, James W., ed. 1991. Replication Research in the Social Sciences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Pendlebury, David. 1994. (Institute for Scientific Information.) Telephone conversation. 8 September.Google Scholar
Sieber, Joan E., ed., 1991. Sharing Social Science Data: Advantages and Challenges, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@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 saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.

Replication, Replication
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save 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 used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Replication, Replication
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save 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 used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Replication, Replication
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *