IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/w7e8q.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Breakdowns in Scientific Practices: How and Why Practices Can Lead to Less than Rational Conclusions (and Proposed Solutions)

Author

Listed:
  • White, Mark
  • Stovner, Roar Bakken

    (Oslo Metropolitan University)

Abstract

This paper considers the rationality of conclusions drawn from empirical social-science. Drawing on validity and institutional theories, our conceptual model views research methods as institutionalized approaches to supporting the (implicit) inferential argument that is used to validate conclusions. Breakdowns occur when researchers falsely believe that a method strongly supports the inferential argument, but where little support is provided. We identify two characteristics of methods that promote breakdowns and show that these characteristics explain breakdowns of two common methods, null hypothesis significance testing and cutoffs for fit indices. Last, we outline alternative methods that can support the same inferences but are less prone to breakdowns. Further, we discuss broadly how to reduce breakdowns in scientific practice.

Suggested Citation

  • White, Mark & Stovner, Roar Bakken, 2023. "Breakdowns in Scientific Practices: How and Why Practices Can Lead to Less than Rational Conclusions (and Proposed Solutions)," OSF Preprints w7e8q, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:w7e8q
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/w7e8q
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/646f474c9a89e200a71c43ad/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/w7e8q?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ronald D. Fricker & Katherine Burke & Xiaoyan Han & William H. Woodall, 2019. "Assessing the Statistical Analyses Used in Basic and Applied Social Psychology After Their p-Value Ban," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(S1), pages 374-384, March.
    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. Lidon Moliner & Francisco Alegre, 2020. "Effects of peer tutoring on middle school students’ mathematics self-concepts," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. David J. Hand, 2022. "Trustworthiness of statistical inference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(1), pages 329-347, January.
    3. Keith R Lohse & Kristin L Sainani & J Andrew Taylor & Michael L Butson & Emma J Knight & Andrew J Vickers, 2020. "Systematic review of the use of “magnitude-based inference” in sports science and medicine," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Eric W Bridgeford & Shangsi Wang & Zeyi Wang & Ting Xu & Cameron Craddock & Jayanta Dey & Gregory Kiar & William Gray-Roncal & Carlo Colantuoni & Christopher Douville & Stephanie Noble & Carey E Prieb, 2021. "Eliminating accidental deviations to minimize generalization error and maximize replicability: Applications in connectomics and genomics," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Uwe Hassler & Marc‐Oliver Pohle, 2022. "Unlucky Number 13? Manipulating Evidence Subject to Snooping," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 90(2), pages 397-410, August.
    6. Heckelei, Thomas & Huettel, Silke & Odening, Martin & Rommel, Jens, 2021. "The replicability crisis and the p-value debate – what are the consequences for the agricultural and food economics community?," Discussion Papers 316369, University of Bonn, Institute for Food and Resource Economics.
    7. Craig, Russell & Cox, Adam & Tourish, Dennis & Thorpe, Alistair, 2020. "Using retracted journal articles in psychology to understand research misconduct in the social sciences: What is to be done?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    8. Guido W. Imbens, 2021. "Statistical Significance, p-Values, and the Reporting of Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 157-174, Summer.

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:w7e8q. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.