Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTierney, W
dc.contributor.authorHardy, JH
dc.contributor.authorEbersole, CR
dc.contributor.authorLeavitt, K
dc.contributor.authorViganola, D
dc.contributor.authorClemente, EG
dc.contributor.authorGordon, M
dc.contributor.authorDreber, A
dc.contributor.authorJohannesson, M
dc.contributor.authorPfeiffer, T
dc.contributor.authorUhlmann, EL
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-14T19:07:14Z
dc.date.available2020-10-14T19:07:14Z
dc.date.issued2020-11
dc.identifier.issn0749-5978
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/16538
dc.description(Member of Forecasting Collaboration)
dc.description.abstract

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.

dc.format.extent291-309
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier BV
dc.subjectClinical Research
dc.titleCreative destruction in science
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.volume161
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.07.002
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Psychology
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience MANUAL
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dcterms.dateAccepted2020-07-16
dc.rights.embargodate2022-9-29
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.07.002
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2020-11
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV