Can Results-Free Review Reduce Publication Bias? The Results and Implications of a Pilot Study

dc.contributor.author

Findley, MG

dc.contributor.author

Jensen, NM

dc.contributor.author

Malesky, EJ

dc.contributor.author

Pepinsky, TB

dc.date.accessioned

2018-12-10T03:34:17Z

dc.date.available

2018-12-10T03:34:17Z

dc.date.issued

2016-11

dc.date.updated

2018-12-10T03:34:13Z

dc.description.abstract

© 2016, © The Author(s) 2016. In 2015, Comparative Political Studies embarked on a landmark pilot study in research transparency in the social sciences. The editors issued an open call for submissions of manuscripts that contained no mention of their actual results, incentivizing reviewers to evaluate manuscripts based on their theoretical contributions, research designs, and analysis plans. The three papers in this special issue are the result of this process that began with 19 submissions. In this article, we describe the rationale for this pilot, expressly articulating the practices of preregistration and results-free review. We document the process of carrying out the special issue with a discussion of the three accepted papers, and critically evaluate the role of both preregistration and results-free review. Our main conclusions are that results-free review encourages much greater attention to theory and research design, but that it raises thorny problems about how to anticipate and interpret null findings. We also observe that as currently practiced, results-free review has a particular affinity with experimental and cross-case methodologies. Our lack of submissions from scholars using qualitative or interpretivist research suggests limitations to the widespread use of results-free review.

dc.identifier.issn

0010-4140

dc.identifier.issn

1552-3829

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/17730

dc.language

English

dc.publisher

SAGE Publications

dc.relation.ispartof

Comparative Political Studies

dc.relation.isversionof

10.1177/0010414016655539

dc.subject

Social Sciences

dc.subject

Political Science

dc.subject

Government & Law

dc.subject

experimental research

dc.subject

quantitative methods

dc.subject

qualitative methods

dc.subject

results-free review

dc.subject

transparency

dc.subject

preregistration

dc.subject

POLITICAL-SCIENCE

dc.subject

FIELD EXPERIMENT

dc.subject

ANONYMOUS INCORPORATION

dc.subject

NULL HYPOTHESIS

dc.subject

TRIALS

dc.subject

TRANSPARENCY

dc.subject

REGISTRATION

dc.subject

JOURNALS

dc.subject

GROWTH

dc.subject

DEBT

dc.title

Can Results-Free Review Reduce Publication Bias? The Results and Implications of a Pilot Study

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Malesky, EJ|0000-0001-5737-9195

pubs.begin-page

1667

pubs.end-page

1703

pubs.issue

13

pubs.organisational-group

Trinity College of Arts & Sciences

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

Political Science

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

49

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Malesky_CPS_2016.pdf
Size:
134.04 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Accepted version