Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
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.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Donald D. Bergh
University of Denver
Barton M. Sharp
Northern Illinois University
Herman Aguinis
George Washington University
Strategic Organization
University of Liverpool
George Washington University
University of Denver
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Bergh et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a16b0b60f965e9c137b7a29 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127017701076