International Journal of Research in Marketing Replication Corner – Structure and Process
Replication Corner: Outline
Marketing is probably one of the fields with the highest ratio of unsolved problems to researchers. This might be the reason for the relatively low tendency to replicate results of others studies. Nonetheless, as in any other field, replications are one of the building blocks of the structures of knowledge. Replications are important for knowledge accumulation, and for gaining greater understanding into new and/or important effects.
IJRM will create a new journal section, Replication Corner, for this purpose, and invite researchers to submit replication notes along with data. The replication should be performed for an important, interesting, or recently discovered phenomenon; this will be the chief criterion of the review process and the decision to accept the replication note. Replication Notes should be short – a couple of pages long. Figures and tables will be posted online together with the data, and will be available for future use by scholars who wish to run meta-analyses, or compare findings.
It may be important to stress that we encourage replications of behavioral as well as quantitative phenomena. In any case, we are primarily interested in conceptual replications rather than exact replications: that is, authors are asked to replicate with a predefined deviation (e.g., added or relaxed constraints, modified product category or range of parameters, etc.). This way, the field can learn more about the relevance of the effect, and possibly about its boundaries and underlying mechanisms. This means that reports about failures in replicating results are equally important for this corner.
Benefits to the field
In addition to its contribution to enhanced understanding of the validity, size, and boundaries of studied effects, the Replication Corner offers several additional benefits:
- The accumulated data can be used for meta-analyses or other free data inference.
- This is a good avenue for early doctoral training: PhD students can submit such notes as part of seminar assignments.
- Although this is not a primary goal, by increasing scholars’ awareness that their own research findings may be replicated by other researchers, such a section may help set high standards for reporting results and handling data in the field, ultimately improving research quality.
- Replication Notes should short – two pages in length and include a short introduction on the chosen effect and the difference between the original paper and the replication. This should be followed by a more detailed report of the procedure, summary of the results, and limitations of the replications.
- Figures, tables, the data, and the code used should be submitted and will be posted on the website of the journal, for public use.
- A PDF of the original paper (and relevant documents) should be submitted.
- The replication corner has three AE’s: Eric Bradlow, Don Lehmann, and John Lynch.
- We will consider reports of failed replications as well, although we might ask one of the original authors to review the replication attempt in such cases. In such case a careful examination of quality checks (e.g., attention) becomes an important part of the report.
- In the cover letter, authors can explain why they think their replication is important.
- Before embarking on a replication study on an effect that is not on the priority list, authors may consult by submitting a one-paragraph proposal for pre-study evaluation
- The review process should be shorter than a regular paper: The decision is based primarily on relevance and importance. Our goal is to have one review round.
- Each replication will be read by one of the AE’s, who will decide if it should be sent to a reviewer (in some exceptions two reviewers will be used). The AE might ask one of the authors of the original paper to review the replication. The decision will be up or down after this round.
- In some cases, based on the AE judgment, a short rejoinder might be invited.
Jacob Goldenberg & Eitan Muller, IJRM Editors