论文标题

可以在没有专家干预的情况下预测社会科学研究的可复制性:一项探索性研究

Can laypeople predict the replicability of social science studies without expert intervention: an exploratory study

论文作者

Wang, Juntao, Lei, Jonathan, Dreber, Anna, Gordon, Michael, Johannesson, Magnus, Pfeiffer, Thomas, Chen, Yiling

论文摘要

长期以来,已发表研究的复制率一直与社会科学界有关,使理解可复制性成为关键问题。几项研究表明,相关的研究社区可以预测以高度准确性的精确度的个人研究的可复制性。后续工作进一步表明,当专家将研究解释为外行人更容易访问的简短描述时,外行也可以实现高于机会的准确性。从财务和时间的角度来看,稀缺的专家资源的参与可能使这些方法昂贵。在这项工作中,我们探讨了非专业人士在没有专家干预的情况下是否可以预测社会科学研究的可复制性。我们向外行提供了从已发表的社会科学论文中截断的原材料,并引起了与论文有关的问题的答案。我们的结果表明,外行人从事这项技术任务,提供了合理且独立的答案。他们中的大多数也表现出对材料的很好的理解。但是,征求的信息对实际复制结果的预测能力有限。与专家干预相比,我们进一步讨论了我们学到的几堂课,以激发未来的作品。

The low replication rate of published studies has long concerned the social science community, making understanding the replicability a critical problem. Several studies have shown that relevant research communities can make predictions about the replicability of individual studies with above-chance accuracy. Follow-up work further indicates that laypeople can also achieve above-chance accuracy in predicting replicability when experts interpret the studies into short descriptions that are more accessible for laypeople. The involvement of scarce expert resources may make these methods expensive from financial and time perspectives. In this work, we explored whether laypeople can predict the replicability of social science studies without expert intervention. We presented laypeople with raw materials truncated from published social science papers and elicited their answers to questions related to the paper. Our results suggested that laypeople were engaged in this technical task, providing reasonable and self-contained answers. The majority of them also demonstrated a good understanding of the material. However, the solicited information had limited predictive power on the actual replication outcomes. We further discuss several lessons we learned compared to the approach with expert intervention to inspire future works.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源