Does it make sense for an academic to put effort in replicating another study? While reading a paper in Political Analysis (Katz, 2001 [1]) in 2005, I noticed a strange thing. In that paper, the author uses simulations to check how biased estimates are if one estimates fixed effects in a logit model by including fixed effects dummies rather than doing conditional logit.
“Weekend Reads”, the weekly summary by IVAN ORANSKY of Retraction Watch, recently listed two articles on Peer Review. One, a blog by George Borjas, concerns the recent imbroglio at the American Economic Review involving an editor who oversaw the review of an article by one of her coauthors ( read here).
In a recent article in Slate entitled “The Unintended Consequences of Trying to Replicate Research,” IVAN ORANSKY and ADAM MARCUS from Retraction Watch argue that replications can exacerbate research unreliability. The argument assumes that publication bias is more likely to favour confirming replication studies over disconfirming studies. To read more, click here.