Replication as a Social Movement - A Cartography of (International) Replication Initiatives in the Behavioral, Social, and Cognitive Sciences.

研究的可复制性一直是许多研究领域方法标准的核心问题。目前的“复制危机”与以往的辩论有许多共同的关切，并有望通过澄清可复制性这一概念和更新方法标准以适应日益跨学科和数字化的研究环境来改善不同领域的研究。然而，目前提高可复制性的努力已经发展到一个超越早期辩论的水平：关注的问题不再局限于特定领域，而是成为跨学科的。争论甚至延伸到更大的非科学公众。但最重要的是，辩论导致了行动，越来越多的研究实际复制和公布结果，以及建立基础设施，鼓励，以及增加复制研究的实际数量。这是这些复制的倡议，将是主要的研究对象。复制研究是一个核心部分，许多人认为，不仅是为了提高研究质量在一个特定的领域，但作为一个新的，跨学科的研究领域（“复制科学”，“Meta研究”）的贡献。 与以前的研究在科学研究中对新兴的研究领域，我们概念化的复制倡议作为一个社会运动。新兴的研究领域不仅需要新的研究问题，方法或概念，而且还需要行动主义和机构工作，以建立新的期刊，新的协会，新的研究计划等。（问题、方法、概念）与机构（合作，组织，资金）。我们将收集社会，行为和认知科学的所有复制计划的信息，并提供该领域的“地图”。为了调查认识和体制方面的情况，将使用两个主要数据来源：这些举措的出版材料（论文、协议、网站等）。 与利益相关者进行定性访谈。分析将运行在三个方法步骤-文献综述，内容分析，和新语用话语分析-通过关注的论点结构和制度结构。贡献将有三个方面：首先，制图将提供该领域的概况。其次，语篇分析将为新兴研究领域的科学研究提供一个案例分析。复制倡议和复制科学的情况下，分别持有本文献的战略相关性，因为它声称是“Meta”表明一个不寻常的情况下，一个新兴的研究领域是不是跨学科，但跨学科。第三，分析将为复制科学领域的研究人员提供信息，例如关于复制概念和方法的信息，以改进复制设计和作为社会运动的机构工作。

The replicability of research has been a central concern for methodological standards in many research fields. The current “replication crisis” shares many concerns of older debates and promises to improve research across different fields by clarifying replicability as a concept and by updating methodological standards to an increasingly interdisciplinary and digital research environment. However, the current efforts to improve replicability have grown to a level that surpasses earlier debates: Concerns are no longer confined to specific fields, but have become cross-disciplinary. Debates even extend to larger extra-scientific publics. But most importantly, debates have led to action, with an increasing number of actual replications of studies and publishing the results as well as creating infrastructures that encourage, as well as increase the actual number of replication studies. It is these replication initiatives that will be the primary object of study.Replication studies are a central part of what many are seeing not just as contributions to improving research quality within a specific field but as a new, cross-disciplinary field of research (“replication science”, “meta research”). In line with previous research in science studies about emerging research fields we conceptualize replication initiatives as a social movement. Emerging research fields not only require new research questions, methods, or concepts, but also activism and institutional work to found new journals, new associations, new study programs, etc. Conceptualizing replication science as a social movement, thus, allows for capturing the epistemic aspects (questions, methods, concepts) alongside with the institutional (collaboration, organization, funding).We will collect information on all replication initiatives in the social, behavioral, and cognitive sciences and provide a “cartography” of the field. To survey epistemic and institutional aspects, two main data sources will be used: published materials from these initiatives (papers, protocols, websites, etc.) and qualitative interviews with stakeholder. Analysis will run in three methodological steps – literature review, content-analysis, and neopragmatic discourse analysis – by focusing on argumentative structure and institutional structure. The contribution will be three-fold: First, the cartography will provide an overview of the field. Second, the discourse analysis will contribute a case study to the science studies of emerging research fields. The case of replication initiatives and respectively replication science holds a strategic relevance for this literature, as its claim to be “meta” suggests an unusual case where an emerging research field is not inter- but transdisciplinary. Third, the analysis will provide information to researchers in the field of replication science, e.g. about replication concepts and methodologies to improve replication designs and institutional work as a social movement.