2004
Volume 38, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1573-9775
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1236

Abstract

Abstract

The article by Hornikx and Batenburg (2016) invited researchers in language and communication to reflect on problems and possible solutions related to research integrity in conducting and reporting quantitative, empirical research. The reactions from colleagues in the field underline the problems that were described, and present a number of solutions to these problems. In general, these solutions can be summarized under the heading of meta-analytic thinking: one study does not provide a yes-or-no answer to a given answer; it should be designed to provide more robust results (e.g., through replications, multiple message designs), and should be reported in such a way as to be replicable in the research community (e.g., transparency, registration reports).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2016.2.BATE
2016-09-01
2021-12-02
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/15739775/38/2/12_TVT2016.2.BATE.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2016.2.BATE&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2016.2.BATE
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): meta-analytic thinking; NHST; replications; research integrity
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error