Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” Project

In 2018, Silberzahn, Uhlmann, Nosek, and colleagues published an article in which 29 teams analyzed the same research question with the same data: Are soccer referees more likely to give red cards to players with dark skin tone than light skin tone? The results obtained by the teams differed extensi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Katrin Auspurg, Josef Brüderl
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2021-07-01
Series:Socius
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211024421
id doaj-da5a8ce53761458ab00731e4f3d3e553
record_format Article
spelling doaj-da5a8ce53761458ab00731e4f3d3e5532021-07-12T21:34:00ZengSAGE PublishingSocius2378-02312021-07-01710.1177/23780231211024421Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” ProjectKatrin Auspurg0Josef Brüderl1Department of Sociology, LMU Munich, Munich, GermanyDepartment of Sociology, LMU Munich, Munich, GermanyIn 2018, Silberzahn, Uhlmann, Nosek, and colleagues published an article in which 29 teams analyzed the same research question with the same data: Are soccer referees more likely to give red cards to players with dark skin tone than light skin tone? The results obtained by the teams differed extensively. Many concluded from this widely noted exercise that the social sciences are not rigorous enough to provide definitive answers. In this article, we investigate why results diverged so much. We argue that the main reason was an unclear research question: Teams differed in their interpretation of the research question and therefore used diverse research designs and model specifications. We show by reanalyzing the data that with a clear research question, a precise definition of the parameter of interest, and theory-guided causal reasoning, results vary only within a narrow range. The broad conclusion of our reanalysis is that social science research needs to be more precise in its “estimands” to become credible.https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211024421
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Katrin Auspurg
Josef Brüderl
spellingShingle Katrin Auspurg
Josef Brüderl
Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” Project
Socius
author_facet Katrin Auspurg
Josef Brüderl
author_sort Katrin Auspurg
title Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” Project
title_short Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” Project
title_full Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” Project
title_fullStr Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” Project
title_full_unstemmed Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” Project
title_sort has the credibility of the social sciences been credibly destroyed? reanalyzing the “many analysts, one data set” project
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Socius
issn 2378-0231
publishDate 2021-07-01
description In 2018, Silberzahn, Uhlmann, Nosek, and colleagues published an article in which 29 teams analyzed the same research question with the same data: Are soccer referees more likely to give red cards to players with dark skin tone than light skin tone? The results obtained by the teams differed extensively. Many concluded from this widely noted exercise that the social sciences are not rigorous enough to provide definitive answers. In this article, we investigate why results diverged so much. We argue that the main reason was an unclear research question: Teams differed in their interpretation of the research question and therefore used diverse research designs and model specifications. We show by reanalyzing the data that with a clear research question, a precise definition of the parameter of interest, and theory-guided causal reasoning, results vary only within a narrow range. The broad conclusion of our reanalysis is that social science research needs to be more precise in its “estimands” to become credible.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211024421
work_keys_str_mv AT katrinauspurg hasthecredibilityofthesocialsciencesbeencrediblydestroyedreanalyzingthemanyanalystsonedatasetproject
AT josefbruderl hasthecredibilityofthesocialsciencesbeencrediblydestroyedreanalyzingthemanyanalystsonedatasetproject
_version_ 1721306891937644544