Creative destruction in science

Tierney W, Hardy JH, Ebersole CR, Leavitt K, Viganola D, Clemente EG, Gordon M, Dreber A, Johannesson M, Pfeiffer T, Uhlmann EL, Abraham AT, Adamkovic M, Adam-Troian J, Anand R, Arbeau KJ, Awtrey EC, Azar OH, Bahník Š, Baník G, Barbosa Mendes A, Barger MM, Baskin E, Bavolar J, Berkers RM, Besco R, Białek M, Bishop MM, Bonache H, Boufkhed S, Brandt MJ, Butterfield ME, Byrd N, Caton NR, Ceynar ML, Corcoran M, Costello TH, Cramblet Alvarez LD, Cummins J, Curry OS, Daniels DP, Daskalo LL, Daum-Avital L, Day MV, Deeg MD, Dennehy TC, Dietl E, Dimant E, Domurat A, du Plessis C, Dubrov D, Elsherif MM, Engel Y, Fellenz MR, Field SM, Firat M, Freitag RM, Friedmann E, Ghasemi O, Goldberg MH, Gourdon-Kanhukamwe A, Graf-Vlachy L, Griffith JA, Grigoryev D, Hafenbrädl S, Hagmann D, Hales AH, Han H, Harman JL, Hartanto A, Holding BC, Hopfensitz A, Hüffmeier J, Huntsinger JR, Idzikowska K, Innes-Ker AH, Jaeger B, Jankowsky K, Jarvis SN, Jha N, Jimenez-Gomez D, Jolles D, Jozefiakova B, Kačmár P, Šafárik J, Kappmeier M, Kasper M, Keller L, Knapic V, Knutsson M, Kombeiz O, Kowal M, Krekels G, Laine T, Lakens D, Li B, Lo RF, Ludwig J, Marcus JC, Marsh MS, Martinoli M, Martončik M, Master A, Masters-Waage TC, Mayiwar L, Mazei J, McCarthy RJ, McCarthy GS, Mertens S, Micheli L, Miklikowska M, Miron-Shatz T, Montealegre A, Moreau D, Moret-Tatay C, Negrini M, Newall PW, Nilsonne G, Niszczota P, Nobel N, O'Mahony A, Orhan MA, O'Shea D, Oswald FE, Panning M, Pantelis PC, Paruzel-Czachura M, Pedersen MJ, Pennycook G, Plonsky O, Polito V, Price PC, Primbs MA, Protzko J, Quayle M, Rahal RM, Rahman MS, Redford L, Reggev N, Reynolds CJ, Roczniewska M, Ropovik I, Ross RM, Roulet TJ, Rowe AM, Saccardo S, Samahita M, Schaerer M, Schleu JE, Schuetze BA, Senftleben U, Seri R, Shtudiner Z, Shuai J, Sin R, Singh V, Singh A, Sokolova T, Song V, Stafford T, Stanulewicz N, Stevens SM, Strømland E, Stronge S, Sweeney KP, Tannenbaum D, Tepper SJ, Tey KS, Ting H, Tingen IW, Todorovic A, Tse HM, Tybur JM, Vineyard GH, Voslinsky A, Vranka MA, Wai J, Walker AC, Wallace LE, Wang T, Werz JM, Woike JK, Wollbrant CE, Wright JD, Wu SJ, Xiao Q, Yaranon PB, Yeung SK, Yoon S, Yu K, Yucel M, Ziano I, Zultan R, Øverup CS (2020)

Publication Type: Journal article

Publication year: 2020

Journal

Book Volume: 161

Pages Range: 291-309

DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.07.002

Abstract

Drawing on the concept of a gale of creative destruction in a capitalistic economy, we argue that initiatives to assess the robustness of findings in the organizational literature should aim to simultaneously test competing ideas operating in the same theoretical space. In other words, replication efforts should seek not just to support or question the original findings, but also to replace them with revised, stronger theories with greater explanatory power. Achieving this will typically require adding new measures, conditions, and subject populations to research designs, in order to carry out conceptual tests of multiple theories in addition to directly replicating the original findings. To illustrate the value of the creative destruction approach for theory pruning in organizational scholarship, we describe recent replication initiatives re-examining culture and work morality, working parents’ reasoning about day care options, and gender discrimination in hiring decisions. Significance statement: It is becoming increasingly clear that many, if not most, published research findings across scientific fields are not readily replicable when the same method is repeated. Although extremely valuable, failed replications risk leaving a theoretical void— reducing confidence the original theoretical prediction is true, but not replacing it with positive evidence in favor of an alternative theory. We introduce the creative destruction approach to replication, which combines theory pruning methods from the field of management with emerging best practices from the open science movement, with the aim of making replications as generative as possible. In effect, we advocate for a Replication 2.0 movement in which the goal shifts from checking on the reliability of past findings to actively engaging in competitive theory testing and theory building. Scientific transparency statement: The materials, code, and data for this article are posted publicly on the Open Science Framework, with links provided in the article.

Involved external institutions

Toulouse School of Economics France (FR) Technische Universität Dortmund Germany (DE) Loyola University Chicago United States (USA) (US) Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego / Kozminski University Poland (PL) Lund University / Lunds universitet Sweden (SE) BI Norwegian Business School / Handelshøyskolen BI Norway (NO) Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Kosice / Univerzita Pavla Jozefa Šafárika v Košiciach Slovakia (SK) Max-Planck-Institut für Kognitions- und Neurowissenschaften / Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Germany (DE) University of Toronto Canada (CA) University of Wroclaw / Uniwersytet Wrocławski Poland (PL) Universidad de La Laguna Spain (ES) University of Queensland Australia (AU) Northern Illinois University (NIU) United States (USA) (US) Emory University United States (USA) (US) National University of Singapore (NUS) Singapore (SG) Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) / אוניברסיטת בן-גוריון בנגב Israel (IL) University of Kansas (KU) United States (USA) (US) Loughborough University United Kingdom (GB) University of Denver United States (USA) (US) Tilburg University Netherlands (NL) Universität Kassel Germany (DE) Seattle University (SU) United States (USA) (US) University of Prešov / Prešovská univerzita v Prešove Slovakia (SK) University of Alicante / Universidad de Alicante / Universitat d'Alacant Spain (ES) The University of Alabama United States (USA) (US) Evidera United States (USA) (US) Georgia Southern University United States (USA) (US) Eindhoven University of Technology / Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (TU/e) Netherlands (NL) University of Insubria / Università degli Studi dell'Insubria Italy (IT) Stockholm School of Economics (SSE) / Handelshögskolan i Stockholm (HHS) Sweden (SE) European Institute of Business Administration (INSEAD) Singapore (SG) Columbian College of Arts and Sciences United States (USA) (US) University of Virginia (UVA) United States (USA) (US) University of British Columbia Canada (CA) National Research University - Higher School of Economics (HSE) / Высшая школа экономики Russian Federation (RU) University of Amsterdam Netherlands (NL) Trinity College Dublin Ireland (IE) University of Groningen / Rijksuniversiteit Groningen Netherlands (NL) Macquarie University Australia (AU) Harvard University United States (USA) (US) Louisiana State University United States (USA) (US) University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) United States (USA) (US) University of Birmingham United Kingdom (GB) University of Alberta Canada (CA) Federal University of Sergipe / Universidade Federal de Sergipe (UFS) Brazil (BR) Yale University United States (USA) (US) Kingston University United Kingdom (GB) University of Cincinnati United States (USA) (US) Karolinska Institute Sweden (SE) University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley) United States (USA) (US) Palacky University Olomouc / Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci Czech Republic (CZ) University of Otago New Zealand (NZ) PVSPS Prague College of Psychosocial Studies / Pražská vysoká škola psychosociálních studií Czech Republic (CZ) Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KUL) / Catholic University of Leuven Belgium (BE) University of Georgia (UGA) United States (USA) (US) Oregon State University (OSU) United States (USA) (US) Saint Joseph's University United States (USA) (US) The World Bank Group United States (USA) (US) Massey University New Zealand (NZ) King’s College London United Kingdom (GB) Universiteit Gent (UGent) / Ghent University Belgium (BE) University of Oxford United Kingdom (GB) Point Loma Nazarene University United States (USA) (US) Stevens Institute of Technology (SIT) United States (USA) (US) Pacific Lutheran University United States (USA) (US) University of New Hampshire United States (USA) (US) University of Essex United Kingdom (GB) University of Missouri-Columbia (Mizzou) United States (USA) (US) American University of Sharjah / الجامعة الأمريكية في الشارقة‎ United Arab Emirates (AE) Tulane University United States (USA) (US) Aarhus University Denmark (DK) Universität Konstanz Germany (DE) Sveučilište u Rijeci / University of Rijeka Croatia (HR) Linköpings universitet / Linköping University Sweden (SE) Trinity Western University Canada (CA) University of Warwick United Kingdom (GB) Memorial University of Newfoundland (MUN) Canada (CA) York University Canada (CA) Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg Germany (DE)

How to cite

APA:

Tierney, W., Hardy, J.H., Ebersole, C.R., Leavitt, K., Viganola, D., Clemente, E.G.,... Øverup, C.S. (2020). Creative destruction in science. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 161, 291-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2020.07.002

MLA:

Tierney, Warren, et al. "Creative destruction in science." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 161 (2020): 291-309.

BibTeX: Download