Reflections on a registered report replicating a body of dyadic cross‐sectional research.
Saved in:
| Title: | Reflections on a registered report replicating a body of dyadic cross‐sectional research. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Baker, Zachary G. (AUTHOR), Gentzis, Ersie‐Anastasia (AUTHOR), Watlington, Emily M. (AUTHOR), Castejon, Sabrina (AUTHOR), Petit, Whitney E. (AUTHOR), Britton, Maggie (AUTHOR), Haddad, Sana (AUTHOR), DiBello, Angelo M. (AUTHOR), Rodriguez, Lindsey M. (AUTHOR), Derrick, Jaye L. (AUTHOR), Knee, C. Raymond (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Personal Relationships. Dec2020, Vol. 27 Issue 4, p907-938. 32p. 2 Charts. |
| Subjects: | Cross-sectional method, Research teams, Teams in the workplace, Prestige |
| Abstract: | This article reflects on a new kind of registered report (RR) that replicated the work of an early career researcher. The research items targeted in this RR were peer‐reviewed, cross‐sectional, dyadic studies to which the first author of this RR had contributed. The findings being replicated are not noteworthy for their prestige or representativeness of the wider field. Instead, this method of replication may have several benefits and less desirable qualities for the researcher and research team whose work is being replicated, for science more broadly, and for relationship science specifically, reviewed herein. The authors hope that this reflection inspires researchers to improve upon their methodology by incorporating replication of their work early and often into their own research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Personal Relationships is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This article reflects on a new kind of registered report (RR) that replicated the work of an early career researcher. The research items targeted in this RR were peer‐reviewed, cross‐sectional, dyadic studies to which the first author of this RR had contributed. The findings being replicated are not noteworthy for their prestige or representativeness of the wider field. Instead, this method of replication may have several benefits and less desirable qualities for the researcher and research team whose work is being replicated, for science more broadly, and for relationship science specifically, reviewed herein. The authors hope that this reflection inspires researchers to improve upon their methodology by incorporating replication of their work early and often into their own research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 13504126 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/pere.12343 |
