The experimenters' regress reconsidered: Replication, tacit knowledge, and the dynamics of knowledge generation

Feest, Uljana

doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2016.04.003

Cited by 26 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the context of experimentation, the relevant kinds of specifications already presuppose conceptual and material assumptions, many of which are not explicated, about the kinds of factors one is going to treat as relevant to the subject matter (see also Collins 1985, chapter 2). Such conceptual decisions will inform what one takes to be the "experimental result" down the line (Feest 2016). For example, If I am interested in whether listening to Mozart has a positive effect on children's IQ, I will design an experiment, which involves a piece by Mozart as the independent variable and the result of a standardized IQ-test at a later point.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Replication Is Overrated

Feest¹

2019

Philos. of Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why Replication is Overrated Current debates about the replication crisis in psychology take it for granted that direct replication is valuable and focus their attention on questionable research practices in regard to statistical analyses. This paper takes a broader look at the notion of replication as such. It is argued that all experimentation/replication involves individuation judgments and that research in experimental psychology frequently turns on probing the adequacy of such judgments. In this vein, I highlight the ubiquity of conceptual and material questions in research, and I argue that replication is not as central to psychological research as it is sometimes taken to be. 1. Introduction: The "Replication Crisis" In the current debate about replicability in psychology, we can distinguish between (1) the question of why not more replication studies are done (e.g., Romero 2017) and (2) the question of why a significant portion (more than 60%) of studies, when they are done, fail to replicate (I take this number from the Open Science Collaboration, 2015). Debates about these questions have been dominated by two assumptions, namely, first, that it is in general desirable that scientists conduct replication studies that come as close as possible to the original, and second, that the low replication rate can often be attributed to statistical problems with many initial studies, sometimes referred to as "p-hacking" and "data-massaging." 1 1 An important player in this regard is the statistician Andrew Gelman who has been using his blog as a public platform to debate methodological problems with mainstream social psychology (http://andrewgelman.com/).

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Replication Is Overrated

Feest¹

2019

Philos. of Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…В качестве аксиологического основания выступает «компетентностная модель», особенно на ранних этапах [23], как попытка реорганизовать образовательный процесс. Развивается трансдисциплинарность, как комплексный инструмент познания и поиск возможностей педагогической работы с неявным знанием [19] и пониманием принципов [18], в том числе через матрицу компетенций (знания, умения, навыки). Образовательный процесс все чаще продуцируется через групповое (сетевое) взаимодействие -появляются такие формы, как «перевернутый класс» [16].…”

Section: университет формата 30: технократический (инновационный) унunclassified

Модель Университета 4.0

Fadeyev¹,

Zmeyev²,

Gazizov³

2020

Pedagogical Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

В настоящее время в системе образования происходят значительные перемены. Если в дошкольном и общем образовании наконец-то сложился определенный порядок, то высшее образование меняется непрерывно. С одной стороны, происходит весьма болезненный переход на новые образовательные стандарты. В любом высшем учебном заведении сегодня можно слышать понятия «ФГОС третьего поколения», «ФГОС плюс», «ФГОС три плюс плюс», и эти слова часто произносятся с негативным оттенком: имеются сложности с самим процессом перехода, организация не успевает осмыслить и перейти на один стандарт, как на следующий год принимается новый. С другой стороны, происходят качественные изменения в организации образовательного процесса изнутри – наступает время трансформации университетов. Отчасти это происходит из-за влияния развития технологий, информатизации и запросов цифровой экономики. Предпринята попытка обобщить то, что сделано в области преобразования университетов, на основе анализа истории перехода от становления университета версии 1.0 до версии 4.0, или университета будущего, о которой активно говорится среди вузов программы 5-100. К модели университета 4.0 должны прийти в будущем все университеты мира. Данные результаты получены по итогам стратегической сессии по формированию Большего университета, проходившей в Томске со 2 по 6 декабря 2019 г.Today, the educational system is undergoing significant changes. If a definite order finally takes place in preschool and general education, then higher education changes continuously. On the one hand, there is a very painful transition to new educational standards. In any higher education institution today you can hear the concepts of “third generation federal state education”, “federal state plus”, “federal state three plus plus” and these words are often pronounced with a negative connotation: there are difficulties with the transition process itself, the organization does not have time to comprehend and switch to one standard, and next year a new one is adopted. On the other hand, qualitative changes are taking place in the organization of the educational process from the inside – the time has come to transform universities. In part, this is due to the influence of technology development, informatization and the demands of the digital economy. In this paper, an attempt is made to summarize what has been done in the field of university transformation based on an analysis of the history of the transition from the formation of a higher educational university of the first version to version 4.0 or the university of the future, which is actively mentioned among universities of the 5-100 program, about the model that all universities of the world should come to in the future. These results were obtained as a result of a strategic session on the formation of the Greater University, held in Tomsk from December 2 to 6, 2019.

show abstract

“…21 I am afraid nothing close to consensus about what constitutes a successful replication exists in the STS literature, and many contradictory accounts of 'replication' (and related terms) persist (e.g., Popper 1956Popper [1934; Hempel & Oppenheim 1948;Lakatos 1970;Collins 1975Collins , 1985Franklin & Howson 1984;Shapin & Schaffer 1985;Mulkay & Gilbert 1986;Radder 1992;Salmon 1998;Bogen 2001;Schickore 2011;Feest 2016; see Plesser 2018 for just one of many recent examples from science itself ). Regardless, my sense is that a successful replication is one in which an original study's conclusion(s) can be justifiably redrawn, with at least a reasonably similar degree of fit, from a new set of data.…”

Section: The Ethnographic Replicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forty Years after Laboratory Life

Havstad¹

2020

Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an ongoing and robust tradition of science and technology studies (STS) scholars conducting ethnographic laboratory studies. These laboratory studies-like all ethnographies-are each conducted at a particular time, are situated in a particular place, and are about a particular (scientific) culture. Presumably, this contextual specificity means that such ethnographies have limited applicability beyond the narrow slice of time, place, and culture that they each subject to examination. But we (STS scholars) do not always or even often treat them that way. It is beyond common for us to speak about what one or another laboratory study reveals about the laboratory, or "science" much more broadly. Given the contextual specificity of our ethnographic laboratory studies, what justifies this presumed generalizability? Initially, this manuscript surveys typical responses to this question, but then it pursues an unusual one: the potential replicability of ethnographic results. This potential is hereby explored, via an ethnographic replication attempt-one designed and conducted in order to test the generalizability of a particular laboratory study, that of Latour and Woolgar's classic Laboratory Life (1979). The results of the ethnographic replication attempt are reported, and a remarkable degree of replicability is established.

show abstract

The experimenters' regress reconsidered: Replication, tacit knowledge, and the dynamics of knowledge generation

Cited by 26 publications

References 48 publications

Why Replication Is Overrated

Why Replication Is Overrated

Модель Университета 4.0

Forty Years after Laboratory Life

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About