View in EDS

Same as It Ever Was: An Updated Review of Replication Studies in Special Education Journals.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Same as It Ever Was: An Updated Review of Replication Studies in Special Education Journals.
Authors: Cook, Bryan G., Therrien, William J., Waterfield, Danielle A., McClain, Suzanne, Fleming, Jesse I., Robinson, Hannah, Watson, Latesha, Boyle, Joseph
Source: Remedial & Special Education. Jun2025, Vol. 46 Issue 3, p236-248. 13p.
Subjects: Serial publications, Success, Professional practice, Medical coding, Publishing, Special education, Medical screening, Evidence-based medicine
Abstract: Despite the importance of replication studies, previous reviews showed that they comprised less than 1% of publications in special education journals. This review conceptually replicates Lemons and colleagues' previous review to provide updated rates of replication studies in special education journals. We identified 78 studies published in 44 special education journals between 2015 and 2022 that used the term replicat* and met our definition of replication, constituting 0.54% of all publications. Similar to previous findings, most replication studies were conceptual, successfully replicated previous results, and were conducted by one or more authors of the study being replicated. Replications with author overlap were significantly more likely to successfully reproduce the findings of the original study. Journal impact factor was significantly and positively related to journal-level replication rate. Publication rates of replications in special education journals remain similar to previous decades, suggesting that additional efforts are needed to increase the publication of replication research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Remedial & Special Education is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:Despite the importance of replication studies, previous reviews showed that they comprised less than 1% of publications in special education journals. This review conceptually replicates Lemons and colleagues' previous review to provide updated rates of replication studies in special education journals. We identified 78 studies published in 44 special education journals between 2015 and 2022 that used the term replicat* and met our definition of replication, constituting 0.54% of all publications. Similar to previous findings, most replication studies were conceptual, successfully replicated previous results, and were conducted by one or more authors of the study being replicated. Replications with author overlap were significantly more likely to successfully reproduce the findings of the original study. Journal impact factor was significantly and positively related to journal-level replication rate. Publication rates of replications in special education journals remain similar to previous decades, suggesting that additional efforts are needed to increase the publication of replication research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:07419325
DOI:10.1177/07419325241248766