|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Ankel-Peters, Jörg; Brodeur, Abel; Dreber, Anna; Johannesson, Magnus; Neubauer, Florian; Rose, Julian |
| Abstract: | Robustness reproductions and replicability discussions are on the rise in response to concerns about a potential credibility crisis in economics. This paper proposes a protocol to structure reproducibility and replicability assessments, with a focus on robustness. Starting with a computational reproduction upon data availability, the protocol encourages replicators to prespecify robustness tests, prior to implementing them. The protocol contains three different reporting tools to streamline the presentation of results. Beyond reproductions, our protocol assesses adherence to the pre-analysis plans in the replicated papers as well as external and construct validity. Our ambition is to put often controversial debates between replicators and replicated authors on a solid basis and contribute to an improved replication culture in economics. |
| Keywords: | replication, reproducibility, robustness, research transparency, meta-science |
| JEL: | A11 C18 |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:i4rdps:143 |
| By: | Lassen, Anne Sophie; Ivandić, Ria |
| Abstract: | Women continue to be underrepresented in the field of economics, especially among permanent faculty. As parenthood is an important driver of gender inequality in the labor market, we study the impact of children on the academic careers of economists. We find no evidence of delayed or reduced fertility among researchers. Event study estimates reveal that both men's and women's career trajectories are affected by parenthood and face increasing attrition from universities. Men move into the broader research sector, while women leave research completely. We also find a gender gap in the promotion to tenured faculty in the years following parenthood. |
| JEL: | A11 A20 I23 J13 J16 J44 M51 |
| Date: | 2024–05–01 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:124310 |
| By: | Morgan, Thomas J. H.; Smaldino, Paul E. |
| Abstract: | A little over ten years ago, researchers in the social, behavioral and medical sciences faced a crisis: the replication crisis, provoked by the discovery that many published results could not be replicated and were, in many cases, wrong. The scientific community would respond to this crisis with policy reforms. Among them, Open Access (henceforth “OA”) reforms aimed to benefit the public and underfunded researchers by making publications free to read. OA policies have been extremely popular, and more than 20, 000 OA journals now exist whose content is freely available to all (see https://doaj.org/). Collectively, these reforms were intended to put an end to the era of impact-chasing, false-positives, and unpublished truths. In its place would arise a new culture centered on the routine publication and open dissemination of unembellished, robust results. Or so it was hoped. In practice, things didn’t work out as intended. Rather than solving existing problems, some of these scientific reforms have created new and perhaps worse ones as researchers and publishers converged on unanticipated strategies inadvertently incentivized by these new policies. Central to this corruption of science has been pay-as-you-publish “gold” OA publishing. The remedy is to abandon author-paid OA publishing and seek less harmful alternatives. |
| Date: | 2024–08–22 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:3ez9v |
| By: | Dagiene, Eleonora (Mykolas Romeris University); Waltman, Ludo; Dix, Guus |
| Abstract: | This mixed-methods study examines the complex interplay of actors and factors shaping research assessment policies in Lithuania in the period 1996–2008, a period of transition towards Western practices. Analysing policy documents, bibliometric data, interviews, and grey literature, we focus on the interactions between policymakers, international experts, providers of publication data, and researchers. Our findings reveal the significant influence of international networks on Lithuanian policymakers, leading to the adoption of quantitative assessment and reliance on Web of Science data. However, this narrow focus, coupled with existing power dynamics and top-down decision-making, led to unintended consequences and conflicts among disciplines, culminating in a Constitutional Court challenge. This research also highlights the substantial role of journal publishers and data providers in influencing policy shifts. We underscore the need for international organizations to adopt open data sources that encompass a wider array of scholarly outputs. Additionally, national policymakers must consider disciplinary differences and research capacity when designing assessment policies. The Lithuanian experience serves as a cautionary tale, emphasizing the importance of context-specific, inclusive, and flexible research assessment systems, particularly relevant for ongoing reforms such as the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). |
| Date: | 2024–07–28 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:pqusk |