Abstract
A large number of scientists and several news platforms have, over the last few years, been speaking of a replication crisis in various academic disciplines, especially the biomedical and social sciences. This paper answers the novel question of whether we should also pursue replication in the humanities. First, I create more conceptual clarity by defining, in addition to the term “humanities,” various key terms in the debate on replication, such as “reproduction” and “replicability.” In doing so, I pay attention to what is supposed to be the object of replication: certain studies, particular inferences, of specific results. After that, I spell out three reasons for thinking that replication in the humanities is not possible and argue that they are unconvincing. Subsequently, I give a more detailed case for thinking that replication in the humanities is possible. Finally, I explain why such replication in the humanities is not only possible, but also desirable.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 2 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-12 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Research Integrity and Peer Review |
| Volume | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 9 Jan 2019 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Replicability and replication in the humanities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver