Replication research's disturbing trend

H. Evanschitzky, C. Baumgarth, R. Hubbard, J. Armstrong

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

155 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Researchers express concern over a paucity of replications. In line with this, editorial policies of some leading marketing journals now encourage more replications. This article reports on an extension of a 1994 study to see whether these efforts have had an effect on the number of replication studies published in leading marketing journals. Results show that the replication rate has fallen to 1.2%, a decrease in the rate by half. As things now stand, practitioners should be skeptical about using the results published in marketing journals as hardly any of them have been successfully replicated, teachers should ignore the findings until they receive support via replications and researchers should put little stock in the outcomes of one-shot studies.
LanguageEnglish
Pages411-415
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Business Research
Volume60
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2007

Fingerprint

Replication
Research trends
Marketing

Keywords

  • replication
  • policy
  • studies

Cite this

Evanschitzky, H., Baumgarth, C., Hubbard, R., & Armstrong, J. (2007). Replication research's disturbing trend. Journal of Business Research, 60(4), 411-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003
Evanschitzky, H. ; Baumgarth, C. ; Hubbard, R. ; Armstrong, J. / Replication research's disturbing trend. In: Journal of Business Research. 2007 ; Vol. 60, No. 4. pp. 411-415.
@article{1dc362d219034d7492d63877d390580b,
title = "Replication research's disturbing trend",
abstract = "Researchers express concern over a paucity of replications. In line with this, editorial policies of some leading marketing journals now encourage more replications. This article reports on an extension of a 1994 study to see whether these efforts have had an effect on the number of replication studies published in leading marketing journals. Results show that the replication rate has fallen to 1.2{\%}, a decrease in the rate by half. As things now stand, practitioners should be skeptical about using the results published in marketing journals as hardly any of them have been successfully replicated, teachers should ignore the findings until they receive support via replications and researchers should put little stock in the outcomes of one-shot studies.",
keywords = "replication, policy, studies",
author = "H. Evanschitzky and C. Baumgarth and R. Hubbard and J. Armstrong",
year = "2007",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003",
language = "English",
volume = "60",
pages = "411--415",
journal = "Journal of Business Research",
issn = "0148-2963",
number = "4",

}

Evanschitzky, H, Baumgarth, C, Hubbard, R & Armstrong, J 2007, 'Replication research's disturbing trend' Journal of Business Research, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 411-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003

Replication research's disturbing trend. / Evanschitzky, H.; Baumgarth, C.; Hubbard, R.; Armstrong, J.

In: Journal of Business Research, Vol. 60, No. 4, 04.2007, p. 411-415.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Replication research's disturbing trend

AU - Evanschitzky, H.

AU - Baumgarth, C.

AU - Hubbard, R.

AU - Armstrong, J.

PY - 2007/4

Y1 - 2007/4

N2 - Researchers express concern over a paucity of replications. In line with this, editorial policies of some leading marketing journals now encourage more replications. This article reports on an extension of a 1994 study to see whether these efforts have had an effect on the number of replication studies published in leading marketing journals. Results show that the replication rate has fallen to 1.2%, a decrease in the rate by half. As things now stand, practitioners should be skeptical about using the results published in marketing journals as hardly any of them have been successfully replicated, teachers should ignore the findings until they receive support via replications and researchers should put little stock in the outcomes of one-shot studies.

AB - Researchers express concern over a paucity of replications. In line with this, editorial policies of some leading marketing journals now encourage more replications. This article reports on an extension of a 1994 study to see whether these efforts have had an effect on the number of replication studies published in leading marketing journals. Results show that the replication rate has fallen to 1.2%, a decrease in the rate by half. As things now stand, practitioners should be skeptical about using the results published in marketing journals as hardly any of them have been successfully replicated, teachers should ignore the findings until they receive support via replications and researchers should put little stock in the outcomes of one-shot studies.

KW - replication

KW - policy

KW - studies

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003

DO - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003

M3 - Article

VL - 60

SP - 411

EP - 415

JO - Journal of Business Research

T2 - Journal of Business Research

JF - Journal of Business Research

SN - 0148-2963

IS - 4

ER -

Evanschitzky H, Baumgarth C, Hubbard R, Armstrong J. Replication research's disturbing trend. Journal of Business Research. 2007 Apr;60(4):411-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003