.png){kind=icon}
返回
Creative destruction in science
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.07.002.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
Drawing on the concept of a gale of creative destruction in a capitalistic economy, we argue that initiatives to assess the robustness of findings in the organizational literature should aim to simultaneously test competing ideas operating in the same theoretical space. In other words, replication efforts should seek not just to support or question the original findings, but also to replace them with revised, stronger theories with greater explanatory power. Achieving this will typically require adding new measures, conditions, and subject populations to research designs, in order to carry out conceptual tests of multiple theories in addition to directly replicating the original findings. To illustrate the value of the creative destruction approach for theory pruning in organizational scholarship, we describe recent replication initiatives re-examining culture and work morality, working parents' reasoning about day care options, and gender discrimination in hiring decisions. Significance statement: It is becoming increasingly clear that many, if not most, published research findings across scientific fields are not readily replicable when the same method is repeated. Although extremely valuable, failed replications risk leaving a theoretical void-reducing confidence the original theoretical prediction is true, but not replacing it with positive evidence in favor of an alternative theory. We introduce the creative destruction approach to replication, which combines theory pruning methods from the field of management with emerging best practices from the open science movement, with the aim of making replications as generative as possible. In effect, we advocate for a Replication 2.0 movement in which the goal shifts from checking on the reliability of past findings to actively engaging in competitive theory testing and theory building. Scientific transparency statement: The materials, code, and data for this article are posted publicly on the Open Science Framework, with links provided in the article.
Keyword:
Replication
Theory pruning
Theory testing
Direct replication
Conceptual replication
Falsification
Hiring decisions
Gender discrimination
Work-family conflict
Cultural differences
Work values
Protestant work ethic
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
3.8
论文数:
2.3K
被引数:
1.6W
机构
引用论文
RACIAL AMBIVALENCE AND AMERICAN VALUE CONFLICT - CORRELATIONAL AND PRIMING STUDIES OF DUAL COGNITIVE STRUCTURES种族矛盾心理与美国价值观冲突 -- 双重认知结构的相关与启动研究
PREAI
分享收藏分享收藏Using prediction markets to estimate the reproducibility of scientific research使用预测市场来估计科学研究的可重复性
OAAI
OAAI分享收藏Towards a balanced social psychology: Causes, consequences, and cures for the problem-seeking approach to social behavior and cognition走向平衡的社会心理学: 寻求社会行为和认知问题的原因，后果和治疗方法
PREAI
分享收藏Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Samples and Settings许多实验2: 调查样本和设置之间的可复制性差异OAAI
OAAI分享收藏Sexism, rape myths and feminist identification explain gender differences in attitudes toward the #metoo social media campaign in two countries.png)
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGYIF2.6
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容