Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T01:52:14.565Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Increasing the Credibility of Political Science Research: A Proposal for Journal Reforms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2015

Brendan Nyhan
Brendan Nyhan*
Affiliation:
Dartmouth College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Section II: Changing Incentives
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 48 , Special Issue S1: Let’s Be Heard! How to Better Communicate Political Science’s Public Value , September 2015 , pp. 78 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2015 

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

REFERENCES

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. n.d. “Editorial Policy.” Available at www.aeaweb.org/aej/app/edpolicy.php (accessed February 7, 2014).Google Scholar
American Economic Review. n.d. “The American Economic Review: Data Availability Policy.” Available at www.aeaweb.org/aer/data.php (accessed February 6, 2014).Google Scholar
American Journal of Political Science. n.d. “Guidelines for Accepted Articles.” Available at http://ajps.org/guidelines-for-accepted-articles (accessed February 6, 2014).Google Scholar
APSA Committee on Professional Ethics, Rights, and Freedoms. 2012. “A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science.” Second edition. Available at http://www.apsanet.org/files/Publications/APSAEthicsGuide2012.pdf (accessed April, 2015).Google Scholar
Baicker, Katherine, Taubman, Sarah L., Allen, Heidi L., Bernstein, Mira, Gruber, Jonathan H., Newhouse, Joseph P., Schneider, Eric C., et al. 2013. “The Oregon Experiment: Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes.” New England Journal of Medicine 368 (18): 1713–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beger, Andreas. 2014. “The Coup in Thailand and Progress in Forecasting.” Predictive Heuristics. May 22. Available at http://predictiveheuristics.com/2014/05/22/the-coup-in-thailand-and-progress-in-forecasting (accessed June 13, 2014).Google Scholar
Button, Katherine S., Ioannidis, John P. A., Mokrysz, Claire, Nosek, Brian A., Flint, Jonathan, Robinson, Emma S. J., and Munafò, Marcus R.. 2013. “Power Failure: Why Small Sample Size Undermines the Reliability of Neuroscience.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14: 365–76.Google Scholar
Cahoy, Daniel R. 2010. “Editor’s Corner: Assembling a Special Issue on Law as a Source of Strategic Advantage.” American Business Law Journal 47 (4): v–viii.Google Scholar
Casey, Katherine, Glennerster, Rachel, and Miguel, Edward. 2012. “Reshaping Institutions: Evidence on Aid Impacts Using a Preanalysis Plan.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 127 (4): 1755–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ceci, Stephen J., and Williams, Wendy M.. 2011. “Understanding Current Causes of Women’s Underrepresentation in Science.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (8): 3157–62.Google Scholar
Chambers, Christopher D. 2013. “Registered Reports: A New Publishing Initiative at Cortex.” Cortex 49 (3): 609–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, Christopher D., Feredoes, Eva, Muthukumaraswamy, Suresh D., and Etchells, Peter J.. 2014. “Instead of ‘Playing the Game,’ It Is Time to Change the Rules: Registered Reports at AIMS Neuroscience and Beyond.” AIMS Neuroscience 1 (1): 4–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Gregory, Jamie. 2004. “Medical Journals Start Granting CME Credit for Peer Review.” Science Editor 27 (6): 190–1.Google 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): 587–603.Google Scholar
Donnellan, M. Brent, Lucas, Richard E., and Cesario, Joseph. 2015. “On the Association between Loneliness and Bathing Habits: Nine Replications of Bargh and Shalev (2012) Study.” Emotion 15 (1): 109–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doucouliagos, Chris. 2005. “Publication Bias in the Economic Freedom and Economic Growth Literature.” Journal of Economic Surveys 19 (3): 367–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dwan, Kerry, Gamble, Carrol, Williamson, Paula R., and Kirkham, Jamie J.. 2013. “Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias: An Updated Review.” PLOS One 8 (7): e66844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esarey, Justin, and Wu, Ahra. n.d. “The Fault in Our Stars: Measuring and Correcting Significance Bias in Political Science.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Ethics. n.d. “What Should I Expect Once I’ve Submitted?” Available at www.press.uchicago.edu/journals/et/afterSubmission.html?journal=et (accessed February 6, 2014).Google Scholar
Fanelli, Daniele. 2012. “Negative Results Are Disappearing from Most Disciplines and Countries.” Scientometrics 90 (3): 891–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, Christopher J., and Heene, Moritz. 2012. “A Vast Graveyard of Undead Theories: Publication Bias and Psychological Science’s Aversion to the Null.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 555–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Findley, Michael, Jensen, Nathan, Malesky, Edmund, and Pepinsky, Thomas. 2014. “Call for Papers: Special Issue of Comparative Political Studies on Research Transparency in the Social Sciences.” Available at www.ipdutexas.org/cps-transparency-special-issue.html (accessed June 11, 2014).Google Scholar
Finkelstein, Amy, and Baicker, Katherine. n.d. “Oregon Health Insurance Experiment: Analysis Plans.” Available at www.nber.org/oregon/documents.html (accessed February 5, 2014).Google Scholar
Finkelstein, Amy, Taubman, Sarah, Wright, Bill, Bernstein, Mira, Gruber, Jonathan, Newhouse, Joseph P., Allen, Heidi, Baicker, Katherine, and Oregon Health Study Group. 2012. “The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment: Evidence from the First Year.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 127 (3): 1057–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., and Malhotra, Neil. 2008a. “Do Statistical Reporting Standards Affect What Is Published? Publication Bias in Two Leading Political Science Journals.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 3: 313–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., and Malhotra, Neil. 2008b. “Publication Bias in Empirical Sociological Research: Do Arbitrary Significance Levels Distort Published Results?” Sociological Methods & Research 37 (1): 3–30.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Malhotra, Neil, Dowling, Conor M., and Doherty, David. 2010. “Publication Bias in Two Political Behavior Literatures.” American Politics Research 38 (4): 591–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glandon, Philip. 2010. “Report on the American Economic Review Data Availability Compliance Project.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Glymour, M. Maria, and Kawachi, Ichiro. 2005. “Review of Publication Bias in Studies on Publication Bias: Here’s a Proposal for Editors That May Help Reduce Publication Bias.” British Medical Journal 331 (7517): 638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Don, Humphreys, Macartan, and Smith, Jenny. n.d. “Read It, Understand It, Believe It, Use It: Principles and Proposals for a More Credible Research Publication.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Greve, Werner, Bröder, Arndt, and Erdfelder, Edgar. 2013. “Result-Blind Peer Reviews and Editorial Decisions.” European Psychologist 18 (4): 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, Guy, and Pierskalla, Jan H.. n.d. “The Effects of Administrative Unit Proliferation on Service Delivery.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Hanson, Robin. 2010. “Result Blind Review.” November 6. Available at www.overcomingbias.com/2010/11/results-blind-peer-review.html (accessed January 28, 2014).Google Scholar
Humphreys, Macartan, Sierra, Raul Sanchez de la, and Windt, Peter van der. 2013. “Fishing, Commitment, and Communication: A Proposal for Comprehensive Nonbinding Research Registration.” Political Analysis 21 (1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ioannidis, John P. A. 2005. “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.” PLOS Medicine 2 (8): e124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ioannidis, John P. A. 2012. “Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 645–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ishiyama, John. 2014. “Replication, Research Transparency, and Journal Publications: Individualism, Community Models, and the Future of Replication Studies.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (01): 78–83.Google Scholar
King, Gary. 1995. “Replication, Replication.” PS: Political Science and Politics 28 (3): 444–52.Google Scholar
King, Gary. 2006. “Publication, Publication.” PS: Political Science and Politics 39 (1): 119–25.Google Scholar
Laitin, David D. 2013. “Fisheries Management.” Political Analysis 21 (1): 42–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur, and Elman, Colin. 2014. “Openness in Political Science: Data Access and Research Transparency.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (01): 19–42.Google Scholar
Masicampo, E. J., and Lalande, Daniel R.. 2012. “A Peculiar Prevalence of p Values Just Below 0.05.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 65 (11): 2271–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miguel, E., Camerer, C., Casey, K., Cohen, J., Esterling, K. M., Gerber, A., Glennerster, R., et al. 2014. “Promoting Transparency in Social Science Research.” Science 343 (6166): 30–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mind. n.d. “Review Procedure.” Available at www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/mind/review_procedure.html (accessed February 6, 2014).Google Scholar
Monogan, James E. 2013. “A Case for Registering Studies of Political Outcomes: An Application in the 2010 House Elections.” Political Analysis 21 (1): 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, Jacob, and Nyhan, Brendan. 2010. “Bayesian Model Averaging: Theoretical Developments and Practical Applications.” Political Analysis 18 (2): 245–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss-Racusin, Corinne A., Dovidio, John F., Brescoll, Victoria L., Graham, Mark J., and Handelsman, Jo. 2012. “Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (41): 16474–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nosek, Brian A., and Lakens, Daniel. 2014. “Registered Reports: A Method to Increase the Credibility of Published Results.” Social Psychology 45 (3): 137–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyhan, Brendan. 2012a. “Academic Reforms: A Four-Part Proposal.” April 16. Available at www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2012/04/academic-reforms-a-four-part-proposal.html (accessed February 6, 2014).Google Scholar
Nyhan, Brendan. 2012b. “More on Pre-Accepted Academic Articles.” April 27. Available at www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2012/04/more-on-pre-accepted-academic-articles.html (accessed February 6, 2014).Google Scholar
Nyhan, Brendan, Sides, John, and Tucker, Joshua A.. 2015. “APSA as Amplifier: How to Encourage and Promote Public Voices within Political Science.” PS: Political Science and Politics 48(Special Issue): this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perspectives on Psychological Science. n.d. “Registered Replication Reports.” Available at www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/replication (accessed February 5, 2014).Google Scholar
Publications Planning Ad Hoc Committee. 2014. “Report to APSA Council.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (1): 246–56.Google Scholar
Quarterly Journal of Political Science . n.d. “Author Instructions.” Available at http://nowpublishers.com/journals/QJPS/author-instructions (accessed June 13, 2014).Google Scholar
Ritchie, Stuart J., Wiseman, Richard, and French, Christopher C.. 2012. “Failing the Future: Three Unsuccessful Attempts to Replicate Bem’s ‘Retroactive Facilitation of Recall’ Effect.” PLOS One 7 (3): e33423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, Joseph S., Gross, Cary P., Desai, Mayur M., Hong, Yuling, Grant, Augustus O., Daniels, Stephen R., Hachinski, Vladimir C., et al. 2006. “Effect of Blinded Peer Review on Abstract Acceptance.” Journal of the American Medical Association 295 (14): 1675–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Said, Chris. 2012. “It’s the Incentive Structure, People!” Available at http://filedrawer.wordpress.com/2012/04/17 (accessed February 5, 2014).Google Scholar
Simmons, Joseph P., Nelson, Leif D., and Simonsohn, Uri. 2011. “False-Positive Psychology Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant.” Psychological Science 22 (11): 1359–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simonsohn, Uri, Nelson, Leif, and Simmons, Joseph. 2013. “P-Curve: A Key to the File Drawer.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 143 (2): 534–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smulders, Yvo M. 2013. “A Two-Step Manuscript Submission Process Can Reduce Publication Bias.” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 66 (9): 946–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sridharan, Lakshmi, and Greenland, Philip. 2009. “Editorial Policies and Publication Bias: The Importance of Negative Studies.” Archives of Internal Medicine 169 (11): 1022–3.Google Scholar
Steinpreis, Rhea E., Anders, Katie A., and Ritzke, Dawn. 1999. “The Impact of Gender on the Review of the Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates: A National Empirical Study.” Sex Roles 41 (7/8): 509–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taubman, Sarah L., Allen, Heidi L., Wright, Bill J., Baicker, Katherine, and Finkelstein, Amy N.. 2014. “Medicaid Increases Emergency-Department Use: Evidence from Oregon’s Health Insurance Experiment.” Science 343 (6168): 263–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulfelder, Jay. 2014. “Coup Forecasts for 2014.” Dart-Throwing Chimp, January 25. Available at http://dartthrowingchimp.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/coup-forecasts-for-2014 (accessed June 13, 2014).Google Scholar
Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan, Wetzels, Ruud, Borsboom, Denny, van der Maas, Han L. J., and Kievit, Rogier A.. 2012. “An Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 632–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wennerås, Christine, and Wold, Agnes. 1997. “Nepotism and Sexism in Peer Review.” Nature 387:341–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar