IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbt/econwp/24-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Replications Really Receive Fewer Citations?

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This study examines the commonly held belief that replication studies suffer from a significant citation penalty compared to original research. Analysing a sample of 428 replications in economics, we challenge the traditional method of comparing replication citation rates directly with the originals they replicate. We introduce three incentive-based metrics to assess replication citations: the 'same original counterfactuals,' 'same author counterfactuals,' and 'same issue counterfactuals.' These metrics provide a more appropriate comparison by matching replications with comparable non-replication papers in terms of subject area, authorship, and publication venue. Our findings suggest that replications do not invariably receive fewer citations; rather, the citation gap narrows substantially or even reverses when using alternative counterfactual measures. This study not only reframes the discussion about the value of replication in economics but also encourages the academic community to reassess the incentives for conducting and publishing replication studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Coupé & Thomas Logchies & W. Robert Reed, 2024. "Do Replications Really Receive Fewer Citations?," Working Papers in Economics 24/15, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbt:econwp:24/15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.canterbury.ac.nz/cbt/econwp/2415.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dewald, William G & Thursby, Jerry G & Anderson, Richard G, 1986. "Replication in Empirical Economics: The Journal of Money, Credit and Banking Project," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 587-603, September.
    2. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Fecher, Benedikt & Harhoff, Dietmar & Wagner, Gert G., 2019. "Replication studies in economics—How many and which papers are chosen for replication, and why?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 62-83.
    3. Alexandra Baumann & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2020. "Where have all the working papers gone? Evidence from four major economics working paper series," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2433-2441, September.
    4. Andrew C. Chang & Phillip Li, 2022. "Is Economics Research Replicable? Sixty Published Papers From Thirteen Journals Say “Often Notâ€," Critical Finance Review, now publishers, vol. 11(1), pages 185-206, February.
    5. Syed Awais Ahmad Tipu & James Christopher Ryan, 2021. "Are business and management journals anti-replication? An analysis of editorial policies," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 45(1), pages 101-117, September.
    6. B.D. McCullough & Kerry Anne McGeary & Teresa D. Harrison, 2008. "Do economics journal archives promote replicable research?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(4), pages 1406-1420, November.
    7. B.D. McCullough, 2009. "Open Access Economics Journals and the Market for Reproducible Economic Research," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 117-126, March.
    8. Ankel-Peters, Jörg & Fiala, Nathan & Neubauer, Florian, 2023. "Is economics self-correcting? Replications in the American Economic Review," Ruhr Economic Papers 1005, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    9. Lucas C. Coffman & Muriel Niederle, 2015. "Pre-analysis Plans Have Limited Upside, Especially Where Replications Are Feasible," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 81-98, Summer.
    10. Maren Duvendack & Richard W. Palmer-Jones & W. Robert Reed, 2015. "Replications in Economics: A Progress Report," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 12(2), pages 164–191-1, May.
    11. Sebastian Galiani & Paul Gertler & Mauricio Romero, 2017. "Incentives for Replication in Economics," NBER Working Papers 23576, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Syed Awais Ahmad Tipu & James Christopher Ryan, 2021. "Are business and management journals anti-replication? An analysis of editorial policies," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 45(1), pages 101-117, September.
    13. Ryan, James C. & A Tipu, Syed A., 2022. "Business and management research: Low instances of replication studies and a lack of author independence in replications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    14. Camerer, Colin & Dreber, Anna & Forsell, Eskil & Ho, Teck-Hua & Huber, Jurgen & Johannesson, Magnus & Kirchler, Michael & Almenberg, Johan & Altmejd, Adam & Chan, Taizan & Heikensten, Emma & Holzmeist, 2016. "Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in Economics," MPRA Paper 75461, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Colliard, Jean-Edouard & Hurlin, Christophe & Pérignon, Christophe, 2019. "Reproducibility Certification in Economics Research," HEC Research Papers Series 1345, HEC Paris.
    2. Hensel, Przemysław G., 2021. "Reproducibility and replicability crisis: How management compares to psychology and economics – A systematic review of literature," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 577-594.
    3. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Fecher, Benedikt & Harhoff, Dietmar & Wagner, Gert G., 2019. "Replication studies in economics—How many and which papers are chosen for replication, and why?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 62-83.
    4. Mark J. McCabe & Frank Mueller-Langer, 2019. "Does Data Disclosure Increase Citations? Empirical Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Leading Economics Journals," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2019-02, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick, 2018. "Open access to research data: Strategic delay and the ambiguous welfare effects of mandatory data disclosure," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 20-34.
    6. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    7. Nicolas Vallois & Dorian Jullien, 2017. "Replication in experimental economics: A historical and quantitative approach focused on public good game experiments," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01651080, HAL.
    8. Abel Brodeur & Nikolai Cook & Carina Neisser, 2024. "p-Hacking, Data type and Data-Sharing Policy," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(659), pages 985-1018.
    9. Brinkerink, Jasper & De Massis, Alfredo & Kellermanns, Franz, 2022. "One finding is no finding: Toward a replication culture in family business research," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    10. Ankel-Peters, Jörg & Fiala, Nathan & Neubauer, Florian, 2023. "Do economists replicate?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 219-232.
    11. Dreber, Anna & Johannesson, Magnus, 2023. "A framework for evaluating reproducibility and replicability in economics," I4R Discussion Paper Series 38, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    12. Sylvérie Herbert & Hautahi Kingi & Flavio Stanchi & Lars Vilhubern, 2021. "The Reproducibility of Economics Research: A Case Study," Working papers 853, Banque de France.
    13. Nicolas Vallois & Dorian Jullien, 2017. "Replication in experimental economics: A historical and quantitative approach focused on public good game experiments," Working Papers halshs-01651080, HAL.
    14. Lucas C. Coffman & Muriel Niederle & Alistair J. Wilson, 2017. "A Proposal to Organize and Promote Replications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 41-45, May.
    15. Christian Zimmermann, 2015. "On the Need for a Replication Journal," Working Papers 2015-16, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    16. Bruns, Stephan B. & König, Johannes & Stern, David I., 2019. "Replication and robustness analysis of ‘energy and economic growth in the USA: A multivariate approach’," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 100-113.
    17. Nick Huntington‐Klein & Andreu Arenas & Emily Beam & Marco Bertoni & Jeffrey R. Bloem & Pralhad Burli & Naibin Chen & Paul Grieco & Godwin Ekpe & Todd Pugatch & Martin Saavedra & Yaniv Stopnitzky, 2021. "The influence of hidden researcher decisions in applied microeconomics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 944-960, July.
    18. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    19. Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick & Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2014. "Open access to data: An ideal professed but not practised," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1621-1633.
    20. Thibaut Arpinon & Marianne Lefebvre, 2024. "Registered Reports and Associated Benefits for Agricultural Economics," Post-Print hal-04635986, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Replications; Citations; Incentives; Academic Publishing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A10 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - General
    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cbt:econwp:24/15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Albert Yee (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decannz.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.