Premium
COLLECTIVE DELUSION IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES: PUBLISHING INCENTIVES FOR EMPIRICAL ABUSE
Author(s) -
Weimer David L.
Publication year - 1986
Publication title -
review of policy research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.832
H-Index - 45
eISSN - 1541-1338
pISSN - 1541-132X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1541-1338.1986.tb00522.x
Subject(s) - publishing , incentive , worry , replication (statistics) , empirical research , publication bias , selection bias , psychology , social science , sociology , political science , economics , epistemology , medicine , psychiatry , medline , law , anxiety , philosophy , pathology , virology , microeconomics
The implications o f the editorial bias of academic journals for the selection of articles with apparently statistically significant findings are widely recognized but largely ignored. Few worry about the incentives the publishing bias presents to researchers for empirical abuse that brings into question the basis of social science knowledge. One possible solution, desirable but probably impractical, is to review articles with statistical results and conclusions omitted. Another, more practical, approach is to guarantee journal space for replication of previously published research. Finally, editors should take greater care in warning readers about findings that implicitly make unfounded statistical claims.