Replication research's disturbing trend

Heiner Evanschitzky, Carsten Baumgarth, Raymond Hubbard, J. Scott Armstrong

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

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.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)411-415
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Business Research
Volume60
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2007

Fingerprint

Research trends
Replication
Marketing

Keywords

  • replication
  • policy
  • studies

Cite this

Evanschitzky, Heiner ; Baumgarth, Carsten ; Hubbard, Raymond ; Armstrong, J. Scott. / Replication research's disturbing trend. In: Journal of Business Research. 2007 ; Vol. 60, No. 4. pp. 411-415.
@article{65d8861d1366439097c2f0aedb1a1b45,
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 = "Heiner Evanschitzky and Carsten Baumgarth and Raymond Hubbard and Armstrong, {J. Scott}",
note = "Copyright 2007 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
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",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "4",

}

Replication research's disturbing trend. / Evanschitzky, Heiner; Baumgarth, Carsten; Hubbard, Raymond; Armstrong, J. Scott.

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, Heiner

AU - Baumgarth, Carsten

AU - Hubbard, Raymond

AU - Armstrong, J. Scott

N1 - Copyright 2007 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

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://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33847665033&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003

DO - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:33847665033

VL - 60

SP - 411

EP - 415

JO - Journal of Business Research

JF - Journal of Business Research

SN - 0148-2963

IS - 4

ER -