Replication Is for Meta-Analysis.
The role or function of experimental and observational replication within empirical science has implications for how replication should be measured. Broadly, there seems to be consensus that replication's central goal is to confirm or vouchsafe the reliability of scientific findings. I argue that if...
| Publicado en: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 89; no. 5; pp. 960 - 970 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
Dec2022
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| Sumario: | The role or function of experimental and observational replication within empirical science has implications for how replication should be measured. Broadly, there seems to be consensus that replication's central goal is to confirm or vouchsafe the reliability of scientific findings. I argue that if this consensus is correct, then most of the measures of replication used in the scientific literature are actually poor indicators of this reliability or confirmation. Only meta-analytic measures of replication align functionally with the goals of replication. I conclude by addressing some objections to meta-analysis. |
|---|