Introduction to Meta-Science in HRD

Abstract

The Problem

Research matters. Results from research can affect policy, practice, and future research. Taking every precaution to assure that research is conducted ethically, accurately, and correctly is a practice that should be exhibited by all disciplines. Unfortunately, this has not been the case with upward of 40% of published research identified as being nonreproducible.

The Solution

The first step for any discipline is to be aware that meta-science problems exists and to identify necessary techniques for preventing these problems from occurring. The current Special Issue introduces meta-science to the field of human resource development (HRD) as a step in informing scholars and scholar-practitioners (a) about the potential problems that exists in other disciplines and (b) what steps could be taken to help prevent these problems from occurring in research within the field of HRD.

The Stakeholders

HRD scholars and scholar-practitioners, collaborators of HRD, researchers, instructors, and students of HRD programs.

Keywords

meta-science reproducibility nonreproducibility ethics statistical reporting statistical guidelines

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Basser

D. S.

(2017). A meta-science for a global bioethics and biomedicine. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 12, Article 9. doi:10.1186/s13010-017-0051-y

Bates

Holton

E. F.

III. Hatala

J. P.

(2012). A revised learning transfer system inventory: Factorial replication and validation. Human Resource Development International, 15, 549-569. doi:10.1080/13678868.2012.726872

Begley

G. C.

Ioannidis

P. A.

(2015). Reproducibility in science: Improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circulation Research, 116, 116-126. doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819

Bohannon

(2015). Many psychology papers fail replication test. Science, 349, 910-911. doi:10.1126/science.349.6251.910

Freese

Peterson

(2017). Replication in social science. Annual Review of Sociology, 43, 147-165. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053450

Hunter

(2013). The science of progress and the progress of science: With increasing demands for science to provide value, how do we assess research to ensure that short-term gains do not undermine long-term goals? European Molecular Biology Organization, 14, 601-604. doi:10.1038/embor.2013.83

Ioannidis

J. P.

(2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS medicine, 2(8), e124.

Lervik

J. E.

Hennestad

B. W.

Amdam

R. P.

Lunnan

Nilsen

S. M.

(2005). Implementing human resource development best practices: Replication or re-creation. Human Resource Development International, 8, 345-360. doi:10.1080/13678860500149969

Stewart

Ward

(2018). Meta-science urgently needed across the environmental nexus: A comment on Berger-Tal et al. Behavioral Ecology, 30, 9-10. doi:10.1093/beheco/ary155

10.

Umesh

R. A.

(2013). Sharing the ideas of meta–science to improve quality of research. Kathmandu University Medical Journal, 11, 75-77. doi:10.3126/kumj.v11i1.11032

11.

Van Bavel

J. J.

Mende-Siedlecki

Brady

W. J.

Reinero

D. A

. (2016). Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113, 6454-6459. doi:10.1073/pnas.1521897113

12.

Wasserstein

R. L.

Lazar

N. A.

(2016). The ASA’s statement on p–values: Context, process, and purpose. The American Statistician, 70, 129-133. doi:10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108