Suchergebnisse

Ali de Regt kon haar eigen verdiensten goed relativeren, maar in dit in memoriam laat Thijs Bol zien waarom zij belangrijk is geweest voor hem en de Nederlandse sociologie.

Replicating published studies promotes active learning of quantitative research skills. Drawing on experiences from a replication course, we provide practical tips and reflections for teachers who consider incorporating replication in their courses. We discuss teaching practices and challenges we encountered at three stages of a replication course: student recruitment, course structure and proceedings, and learning outcomes. We highlight that by engaging in replication, students learn from established scholarly work in a collaborative and reflective manner. Students not only improve their quantitative literacy but also learn more generally about the scientific method and the production of research.

This study explores how researchers' analytical choices affect the reliability of scientific findings. Most discussions of reliability problems in science focus on systematic biases. We broaden the lens to emphasize the idiosyncrasy of conscious and unconscious decisions that researchers make during data analysis. We coordinated 161 researchers in 73 research teams and observed their research decisions as they used the same data to independently test the same prominent social science hypothesis: that greater immigration reduces support for social policies among the public. In this typical case of social science research, research teams reported both widely diverging numerical findings and substantive conclusions despite identical start conditions. Researchers' expertise, prior beliefs, and expectations barely predict the wide variation in research outcomes. More than 95% of the total variance in numerical results remains unexplained even after qualitative coding of all identifiable decisions in each team's workflow. This reveals a universe of uncertainty that remains hidden when considering a single study in isolation. The idiosyncratic nature of how researchers' results and conclusions varied is a previously underappreciated explanation for why many scientific hypotheses remain contested. These results call for greater epistemic humility and clarity in reporting scientific findings.