Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Can We Do Better? Replication and Online Appendices in Political Science

  • Jonathan Grossman and Ami Pedahzur

Abstract

Replicability in political science is on the rise, as disciplinary journals have been placing a growing emphasis on data access and research transparency (DA–RT) practices and policies. As a result, nearly every article that is published today in leading political science journals offers an online appendix that includes data, code, and methodological explanations necessary for replication. While these developments are laudable, many appendices still do not enable satisfactory replication because they are inaccessible, compartmentalized, and difficult to understand. In this article and in its accompanying online appendix, we demonstrate this problem and make the case for more accessible and comprehensive appendices whose contribution can fulfill and go beyond mere replicability. We propose several ways in which authors and journals can produce better appendices, namely, by making appendices more intuitive, integrated, and standardized, and by choosing an adequate online platform on which to create and host the appendix.

Copyright

Footnotes

Hide All

A list of permanent links to Supplemental Materials provided by the authors precedes the References section.

*

Data replication sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/VXZZ0J

The research for this paper was supported by the Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Leonard Davis Institute Research Seminar in January 2020. We thank the participants of the seminar for their constructive comments. We are especially indebted to Yoram Haftel and Raelene Camille Wyse for their excellent suggestions.

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Alvarez, R. Michael, Key, Ellen M., and Núñez, Lucas. 2018. “Research Replication: Practical Considerations.” PS: Political Science & Politics 51(2): 422–26.
Beukema, Patrick. 2018. “Modernizing Academic Data Science.” Towards Data Science. Retrieved March 6, 2020 (https://towardsdatascience.com/modernizing-academic-data-science-4213794a278e).
Dunleavy, Patrick, Park, Alice, and Taylor, Ros, eds. 2018. The UK’s Changing Democracy: The 2018 Democratic Audit. London: LSE Press. Retrieved March 6, 2020 (https://www.democraticaudit.com/the-uks-changing-democracy-the-2018-democratic-audit/).
Elman, Colin, Kapiszewski, Diana, and Lupia, Arthur. 2018. “Transparent Social Inquiry: Implications for Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 21(1): 2947.
Flinders, Matthew. 2015. “The Rediscovery of the Political Imagination.” In The Relevance of Political Science, ed. Stoker, Gerry, Peters, B. Guy, and Pierre, Jon, 6583. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gibson, James L. 1995. “Cautious Reflections on a Data-Archiving Policy for Political Science.” PS: Political Science & Politics 28(3): 473–76.
Golder, Matt, and Golder, Sona N.. 2016. “Symposium: Data Access and Research Transparency (DA-RT).” Comparative Politics Newsletter 26(1): 1064.
Hahn, Oliver, and Stalph, Florian, eds. 2018. Digital Investigative Journalism: Data, Visual Analytics and Innovative Methodologies in International Reporting. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ishiyama, John. 2014. “Replication, Research Transparency, and Journal Publications: Individualism, Community Models, and the Future of Replication Studies.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47(1): 7883.
Karcher, Sebastian, and Weber, Nicholas. 2019. “Annotation for Transparent Inquiry: Transparent Data and Analysis for Qualitative Research.” IASSIST Quarterly 43(2). Retrieved March 6, 2020 (https://doi.org/10.29173/iq959).
Key, Ellen M. 2016. “How Are We Doing? Data Access and Replication in Political Science.” PS: Political Science & Politics 49(2): 268–72.
King, Gary. 1995. “Replication, Replication.” PS: Political Science & Politics 28(3): 444–52.
Lasswell, Harold Dwight. 1950. Politics: Who Gets What, When, How. New York: P. Smith.
Lieberman, Evan S. 2010. “Bridging the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide: Best Practices in the Development of Historically Oriented Replication Databases.” Annual Review of Political Science 13(1): 3759.
Lupia, Arthur, and Elman, Colin. 2014. “Openness in Political Science: Data Access and Research Transparency: Introduction.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47(1): 1942.
Meier, Kenneth J. 1995. “Replication: A View from the Streets.” PS: Political Science & Politics 28(3): 456–59.
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2014. “Trust, but Verify: The Transparency Revolution and Qualitative International Relations.” Security Studies 23(4): 663–88.
Musgrave, Paul, and Karcher, Sebastian. 2018. “Seven Reasons We Use Annotation for Transparent Inquiry (ATI).” Duck of Minerva. Retrieved March 27, 2020 (https://duckofminerva.com/2018/05/seven-reasons-we-use-annotation-for-transparent-inquiry-ati.html).
Ricks, Jacob I., and Liu, Amy H.. 2018. “Process-Tracing Research Designs: A Practical Guide.” PS: Political Science & Politics 51(4): 842–46.
Tripp, Aili Mari. 2018. “Transparency and Integrity in Conducting Field Research on Politics in Challenging Contexts.” Perspectives on Politics 16(3): 728–38.
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Grossman and Pedahzur Supplementary Materials
Grossman and Pedahzur Supplementary Materials

 PDF (427 KB)
427 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Grossman and Pedahzur Dataset
Dataset

 Unknown

Can We Do Better? Replication and Online Appendices in Political Science

  • Jonathan Grossman and Ami Pedahzur

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.