Replicability in Empirical Legal Research

Jason M. Chin,Kathryn Zeiler
{"title":"Replicability in Empirical Legal Research","authors":"Jason M. Chin,Kathryn Zeiler","doi":"10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-121620-085055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As part of a broader methodological reform movement, scientists are increasingly interested in improving the replicability of their research. Replicability allows others to perform replications to explore potential errors and statistical issues that might call the original results into question. Little attention, however, has been paid to the state of replicability in the field of empirical legal research (ELR). Quality is especially important in this field because empirical legal researchers produce work that is regularly relied upon by courts and other legal bodies. In this review, we summarize the current state of ELR relative to the broader movement toward replicability in the social sciences. As part of that aim, we summarize recent collective replication efforts in ELR and transparency and replicability guidelines adopted by journals that publish ELR. Based on this review, ELR seems to be lagging other fields in implementing reforms. We conclude with suggestions for reforms that might encourage improved replicability.","PeriodicalId":47338,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Law and Social Science","volume":"19 1","pages":"239-260"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Law and Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-121620-085055","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As part of a broader methodological reform movement, scientists are increasingly interested in improving the replicability of their research. Replicability allows others to perform replications to explore potential errors and statistical issues that might call the original results into question. Little attention, however, has been paid to the state of replicability in the field of empirical legal research (ELR). Quality is especially important in this field because empirical legal researchers produce work that is regularly relied upon by courts and other legal bodies. In this review, we summarize the current state of ELR relative to the broader movement toward replicability in the social sciences. As part of that aim, we summarize recent collective replication efforts in ELR and transparency and replicability guidelines adopted by journals that publish ELR. Based on this review, ELR seems to be lagging other fields in implementing reforms. We conclude with suggestions for reforms that might encourage improved replicability.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
实证法律研究中的可复制性
作为更广泛的方法改革运动的一部分,科学家们对提高其研究的可重复性越来越感兴趣。可复制性允许其他人执行复制,以探索可能使原始结果受到质疑的潜在错误和统计问题。然而,在实证法律研究(ELR)领域,对可复制性状况的关注却很少。在这一领域,质量尤其重要,因为实证法律研究人员的工作成果经常被法院和其他法律机构所依赖。在这篇综述中,我们总结了相对于社会科学中更广泛的可复制性运动的ELR的现状。作为这一目标的一部分,我们总结了最近在ELR方面的集体复制努力,以及发表ELR的期刊采用的透明度和可复制性指南。根据这一审查,ELR在实施改革方面似乎落后于其他领域。最后,我们提出了可能鼓励提高可复制性的改革建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Bankruptcy Law's Knowns and Unknowns Centering Race in Studies of Low-Wage Immigrant Labor Authoritarian Legality and State Capitalism in China Mandatory Employment Arbitration How to Study Global Lawmaking: Lessons from Intellectual Property Rights and International Health Emergencies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1