Advancing Rigor and Relevance

Replication is an essential part of  any science, confirming or adjusting our understanding of the world through  repeated exploration of a phenomenon of interest. While there has been an  increased interest in the role of replication studies, there also exists  skepticism regarding the need for more replication. Our empirical analysis of  470 recent studies that use the term ‘replication’ suggests that this  criticism stems from a lack of appreciation of the different forms that  replication can take, the prevalence (or lack thereof) of many of these forms,  and the objectives that are met by one of the least common forms, constructive  replication. As such, the purposes of our paper are 1) to explore the  different forms that constructive replication can take and the objectives at  which each can be directed, 2) to distinguish these forms from other forms of  replication with which they are often confused, 3) to determine how common  each form of replication is in our field, and 4) to provide concrete examples  of different forms of constructiveness from published studies in order to pave  the way towards more (and more useful) replications in the future.