Insights from Two Surveys on the Reproducibility and Replicability of Geographic Research

Keywords: Reproducibility, Replicability, Research Design, Spatial Analysis and Modeling
Abstract Type: Paper Abstract

Abstract

Reproducing and replicating research are important ways of scrutinizing the claims of prior work and building confidence in results and inferences that stand up to repeated testing. While the number of reproduction and replication (R&R) studies undertaken continues to rise, such studies have not yet become commonplace in geography. Existing attempts to reproduce geographic research suggest that many studies are not fully reproducible, or are simply missing components needed to attempt a reproduction. Why this is the case remains unclear. To understand and improve the reproducibility and replicability of geographic research, we must systematically assess geographers' perceptions of R&R, the use of reproducible research practices across the discipline's diverse research traditions, and identify the factors that have kept geographers from conducting more R&R studies. We address each of these questions in two surveys of active geographic researchers selected using probability sampling techniques from a rigorously constructed sampling frame. Our results identify a clear division in perception of R&R among geographic sub-disciplines. We also find varying levels of familiarity with reproducible research practices and a perceived lack of incentives for R&R studies. In contrast, many researchers did report attempting R&R studies but not publishing that work, which suggests a foundation for the examination and expansion of R&R in the field.