While the number of reproduction and replication studies undertaken in the social and behavioral sciences continues to rise, such studies have not yet become commonplace in geography. Existing attempts to reproduce geographic research suggest that many studies cannot be fully reproduced, or are simply missing components needed to attempt a reproduction. Despite this suggestive evidence, we have not yet systematically assessed geographers' perceptions of reproducibility, the use of reproducible research practices across the discipline's diverse research traditions, or identified the factors that have kept geographers from conducting more reproduction studies. This study addresses each of these questions by surveying active geographic researchers selected using probability sampling techniques from a rigorously constructed sampling frame. Our results identify a clear division in perception of reproducibility among geographic sub-fields. We also find varying levels of familiarity with reproducible research practices and a perceived lack of incentives to attempt and publish reproduction studies. In contrast, many researchers did report attempting to reproduce their own work but not publishing those efforts, which suggests a foundation exists for the examination and expansion of reproducibility in the field.
The contents of this repository are outlined in three tables:
Additionally, the docs/presentation directory contains code for a Shiny App data visualization.
The template_readme.md file contains more information on structure and rationale of this research template repository, as well as important references and licenses.