Authors : Frank Mueller-Langer, Benedikt Fecher, Dietmar Harhoff, Gert G.Wagner
We investigate how often replication studies are published in empirical economics and what types of journal articles are replicated. We find that between 1974 and 2014 0.1% of publications in the top 50 economics journals were replication studies.
We consider the results of published formal replication studies (whether they are negating or reinforcing) and their extent: Narrow replication studies are typically devoted to mere replication of prior work, while scientific replication studies provide a broader analysis.
We find evidence that higher-impact articles and articles by authors from leading institutions are more likely to be replicated, whereas the replication probability is lower for articles that appeared in top 5 economics journals.
Our analysis also suggests that mandatory data disclosure policies may have a positive effect on the incidence of replication.
URL : Replication studies in economics—How many and which papers are chosen for replication, and why?
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.07.019
Authors : Benedikt Fecher, Sascha Friesike, Marcel Hebing, Stephanie Linek
Open access to research data has been described as a driver of innovation and a potential cure for the reproducibility crisis in many academic fields. Against this backdrop, policy makers are increasingly advocating for making research data and supporting material openly available online.
Despite its potential to further scientific progress, widespread data sharing in small science is still an ideal practised in moderation. In this article, we explore the question of what drives open access to research data using a survey among 1564 mainly German researchers across all disciplines.
We show that, regardless of their disciplinary background, researchers recognize the benefits of open access to research data for both their own research and scientific progress as a whole. Nonetheless, most researchers share their data only selectively.
We show that individual reward considerations conflict with widespread data sharing. Based on our results, we present policy implications that are in line with both individual reward considerations and scientific progress.
URL : A reputation economy: how individual reward considerations trump systemic arguments for open access to data
DOI : 10.1057/palcomms.2017.51
Authors : Benedikt Fecher, Gert G. Wagner
In this article we argue that the current endeavors to achieve open access in scientific
literature require a discussion about innovation in scholarly publishing and research infrastructure.
Drawing on path dependence theory and addressing different open access (OA) models and recent political endeavors, we argue that academia is once again running the risk of outsourcing the organization of its content.
URL : Open Access, Innovation, and Research Infrastructure
Alternative location : http://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/4/2/17