On the scientific superiority of conceptual replications for scientific progress

By C. Crandall, Jeffrey W. Sherman. 2016

297 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, History and Philosophy of Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8fb74484119bd92bccb3c84e0705e6755064570b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Amy Willerson
2. Dianna R. Mullet
3. Kareem Khalifa
4. Daniel A. Wilkenfeld
5. Fiery Cushman
6. James R. Beebe
7. Edouard Machery
8. Joshua Knobe

In History and Philosophy of Science

1. Kareem Khalifa
2. Daniel A. Wilkenfeld
3. Fiery Cushman
4. Jan Sprenger
5. Edouard Machery
6. Tania Lombrozo

In Statistics and Probability

1. Daniel A. Wilkenfeld
2. Edouard Machery
3. Joshua Knobe

Citations in the corpus

• Teachers’ Perceptions of Creativity in the Classroom (2018, background): “The purpose of this study was to conceptually replicate (Crandall & Sherman, 2016) previous studies examining teachers’ perceptions of creative characteristics in students.”
• Estimating the Reproducibility of Experimental Philosophy (2018, background): “…involve making a deliberate change to one or more aspects of the original design or methods, often to explore issues surrounding generalizability (Crandall & Sherman, 2016; Hendrick, 1990; Schmidt, 2009; for a different take on the relation between direct and conceptual replications, however,…”