Is there a credibility crisis in strategic management research? Evidence on the reproducibility of study findings

被引:113
作者
Bergh, Donald D. [1 ,2 ]
Sharp, Barton M. [3 ]
Aguinis, Herman [4 ]
Li, Ming [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Denver, Business Adm, Denver, CO 80208 USA
[2] Univ Denver, Management, Denver, CO 80208 USA
[3] Northern Illinois Univ, Dept Management, Entrepreneurship, De Kalb, IL USA
[4] George Washington Univ, Sch Business, Management, Washington, DC 20052 USA
[5] Univ Liverpool, Management Sch, Liverpool, Merseyside, England
关键词
knowledge credibility; replication; reproducibility; QUESTIONABLE RESEARCH PRACTICES; PSYCHOLOGY; EDITORS; RECOMMENDATIONS; PERFORMANCE; JOURNALS; AUTHORS; TESTS; CALL;
D O I
10.1177/1476127017701076
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Recent studies report an inability to replicate previously published research, leading some to suggest that scientific knowledge is facing a credibility crisis. In this essay, we provide evidence on whether strategic management research may itself be vulnerable to these concerns. We conducted a study whereby we attempted to reproduce the empirical findings of 88 articles appearing in the Strategic Management Journal using data reported in the articles themselves. About 70% of the studies did not disclose enough data to permit independent tests of reproducibility of their findings. Of those that could be retested, almost one-third reported hypotheses as statistically significant which were no longer so and far more significant results were found to be non-significant in the reproductions than in the opposite direction. Collectively, incomplete reporting practices, disclosure errors, and possible opportunism limit the reproducibility of most studies. Until disclosure standards and requirements change to include more complete reporting and facilitate tests of reproducibility, the strategic management field appears vulnerable to a credibility crisis.
引用
收藏
页码:423 / 436
页数:14
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
Aguinis H, 1997, J APPL PSYCHOL, V82, P528
[2]  
Aguinis H., 2004, Regression analysis for categorical moderators
[3]   Best-Practice Recommendations for Defining, Identifying, and Handling Outliers [J].
Aguinis, Herman ;
Gottfredson, Ryan K. ;
Joo, Harry .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2013, 16 (02) :270-301
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2015, FINANCE EC DISCUSSIO
[5]   Revealed or Concealed? Transparency of Procedures, Decisions, and Judgment Calls in Meta-Analyses [J].
Aytug, Zeynep G. ;
Rothstein, Hannah R. ;
Zhou, Wencang ;
Kern, Mary C. .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2012, 15 (01) :103-133
[6]  
Baker R, 2012, NATURE, DOI 10.1038.2012.1/176
[7]   The (mis)reporting of statistical results in psychology journals [J].
Bakker, Marjan ;
Wicherts, Jelte M. .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2011, 43 (03) :666-678
[8]   Questions About Questionable Research Practices in the Field of Management: A Guest Commentary [J].
Banks, George C. ;
O'Boyle, Ernest H., Jr. ;
Pollack, Jeffrey M. ;
White, Charles D. ;
Batchelor, John H. ;
Whelpley, Christopher E. ;
Abston, Kristie A. ;
Bennett, Andrew A. ;
Adkins, Cheryl L. .
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 2016, 42 (01) :5-20
[9]   Raise standards for preclinical cancer research [J].
Begley, C. Glenn ;
Ellis, Lee M. .
NATURE, 2012, 483 (7391) :531-533
[10]   Measuring and testing change in strategic management research [J].
Bergh, DD ;
Fairbank, JF .
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2002, 23 (04) :359-366