Supporting replication research in management journals: Qualitative analysis of editorials published between 1970 and 2015

2018/03/15 by Przemysław Hensel, Przemysław G. Hensel · 1 voice · 2 citations
Business, Management and Accounting · #Accounting and Organizational Management #Innovation and Knowledge Management #Management and Organizational Studies

paper · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2018.03.004

openalex publication_date 2018/03/15 · crossref created 2018/03/15 · crossref issued 2019/02/01 · crossref published 2019/02/01 · crossref published-print 2019/02/01 · crossref deposited 2025/10/02 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2025/11/06 · crossref indexed 2026/04/21

Citations

• Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
• The Place of Inter-Rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: An Empirical Study
• Shall we Really do it Again? The Powerful Concept of Replication is Neglected in the Social Sciences
• Conjectures and Refutations
• Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling
• INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE SPONSORSHIP OF COMMON TECHNOLOGICAL STANDARDS: THE CASE OF SUN MICROSYSTEMS AND JAVA.
• The Chrysalis Effect
• False-Positive Psychology
• Editorial: Evidence on Questionable Research Practices: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
• Harking, Sharking, and Tharking
• A manifesto for reproducible science

Cited by

• How do editors use editorials to lead their journals? Insights from the field of human resource management
• Can they trust us? The relevance debate and the perceived trustworthiness of the management scholarly community

Discussions

• Replication research in top management journals between 1970 and 2015; how is the issue framed and discussed and how is edpolicy communicated to readers. Only 67 of 1901 editorials published invoke th [bsky, 0 points, 1 comments]