Is there a credibility crisis in strategic management research? Evidence on the reproducibility of study findings
尝试重复《战略管理杂志》88篇文章的实证结果，发现约70%未披露足够数据，可重复的研究中近三分之一原显著结果不再显著，表明战略管理领域面临可信度危机。
Recent studies report an inability to replicate previously published research, leading some to suggest that scientific knowledge is facing a credibility crisis. In this essay, we provide evidence on whether strategic management research may itself be vulnerable to these concerns. We conducted a study whereby we attempted to reproduce the empirical findings of 88 articles appearing in the Strategic Management Journal using data reported in the articles themselves. About 70% of the studies did not disclose enough data to permit independent tests of reproducibility of their findings. Of those that could be retested, almost one-third reported hypotheses as statistically significant which were no longer so and far more significant results were found to be non-significant in the reproductions than in the opposite direction. Collectively, incomplete reporting practices, disclosure errors, and possible opportunism limit the reproducibility of most studies. Until disclosure standards and requirements change to include more complete reporting and facilitate tests of reproducibility, the strategic management field appears vulnerable to a credibility crisis.