Replicability. Politics and Poetics of Accountability, Validation and Legitimation

Frontiers in Psychology 11 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Replicability is a term that not only comes with different meanings in the literature of many domains but is often associated or confused with other terms such as ‘reproducibility,’ ‘repeatability,’ ‘reliability,’ ‘validity,’ and so on. To add to the confusion, it can even be used differently across diverse disciplines. Though all named concepts are important, what makes them barely advantageous is that they do not cover some peculiar aspects of the replicability and validation processes, i.e., appropriateness of conceptualization; trustworthiness of operational definition and operational acts; accuracy of researcher’s description, categorization and/or measurement; successfulness of observational (or field) relation. Moreover, in social sciences and organization studies, the concept of validity of data is highly questionable due to the quite frequent shortage of real statuses of the observed objects. The present paper aims to challenge the received view on the concept of ‘replicability,’ by proposing a “situational approach” based on the idea that replicability works under certain organizational and socio-technic conditions, and that it is heavily influenced by the way that different stakeholders (scientists, technicians, participants artifacts, and technologies) respond to them. Consequently, it is important to understand how and why replicability works in different contexts. Its main purpose, without denying the importance of current conventional perspectives on replicability and its siblings, is to widen and change them to include an organizational setting and a reflexive epistemology. This implies the pursuit of a third way of replicability, between the postmodernist negation of its possibility and its opposite, i.e., a naïve naturalism. A way asserting that replicability is a jigsaw puzzle or a mosaic, constituted by discursive practices (poetics) and organizational achievements guiding the politics of accountability, validation and legitimation. The domain here considered pertains to the social and organizational sciences. However, though going beyond the aim of this essay, many issues could be reframed and adapted to medical, natural and physical sciences, as some of the following examples can show.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,931

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The limits of replicability.Stephan Guttinger - 2020 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 10 (2):1-17.
Philosophy of science and the replicability crisis.Felipe Romero - 2019 - Philosophy Compass 14 (11):e12633.
The Epistemic Norms of Intra-Scientific Testimony.Mikkel Gerken - 2015 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 45 (6):568-595.
Replicability and replication in the humanities.Rik Peels - 2019 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 4 (1).
Replicability of Experiment.John D. Norton - 2015 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 30 (2):229.
The replicability revolution.Ulrich Schimmack - 2018 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 41.
JSE 32:2 Editorial Summer 2018.Stephen Braude - 2018 - Journal of Scientific Exploration 32 (2).
Expectancy effects, ESP effects, and replicability.K. Ramakrishna Rao - 1978 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 (3):403-404.
The Division of Replication Labor.Romero Felipe - 2020 - Philosophy of Science 87 (5):1014-1025.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-01-15

Downloads
10 (#1,218,872)

6 months
6 (#585,724)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Giampietro Gobo
Università degli Studi di Milano

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations