Abstract
Replication research is essential for the advancement of any scientific field. In this paper, we argue that prevention science
will be better positioned to help improve public health if (a) more replications are conducted; (b) those replications are
systematic, thoughtful, and conducted with full knowledge of the trials that have preceded them; and (c) state-of-the art
techniques are used to summarize the body of evidence on the effects of the interventions. Under real-world demands it is
often not feasible to wait for multiple replications to accumulate before making decisions about intervention adoption. To
help individuals and agencies make better decisions about intervention utility, we outline strategies that can be used to
help understand the likely direction, size, and range of intervention effects as suggested by the current knowledge base.
We also suggest structural changes that could increase the amount and quality of replication research, such as the provision
of incentives and a more vigorous pursuit of prospective research registers. Finally, we discuss methods for integrating replications
into the roll-out of a program and suggest that strong partnerships with local decision makers are a key component of success
in replication research. Our hope is that this paper can highlight the importance of replication and stimulate more discussion
of the important elements of the replication process. We are confident that, armed with more and better replications and state-of-the-art
review methods, prevention science will be in a better position to positively impact public health.
will be better positioned to help improve public health if (a) more replications are conducted; (b) those replications are
systematic, thoughtful, and conducted with full knowledge of the trials that have preceded them; and (c) state-of-the art
techniques are used to summarize the body of evidence on the effects of the interventions. Under real-world demands it is
often not feasible to wait for multiple replications to accumulate before making decisions about intervention adoption. To
help individuals and agencies make better decisions about intervention utility, we outline strategies that can be used to
help understand the likely direction, size, and range of intervention effects as suggested by the current knowledge base.
We also suggest structural changes that could increase the amount and quality of replication research, such as the provision
of incentives and a more vigorous pursuit of prospective research registers. Finally, we discuss methods for integrating replications
into the roll-out of a program and suggest that strong partnerships with local decision makers are a key component of success
in replication research. Our hope is that this paper can highlight the importance of replication and stimulate more discussion
of the important elements of the replication process. We are confident that, armed with more and better replications and state-of-the-art
review methods, prevention science will be in a better position to positively impact public health.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Pages 1-15
- DOI 10.1007/s11121-011-0217-6
- Authors
- Jeffrey C. Valentine, University of Louisville, 309 College of Education, Louisville, KY 40205, USA
- Anthony Biglan, Oregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR, USA
- Robert F. Boruch, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Felipe González Castro, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
- Linda M. Collins, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA
- Brian R. Flay, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
- Sheppard Kellam, American Institutes for Research, Washington, DC, USA
- Eve K. Mościcki, American Psychiatric Institute for Research and Education, Arlington, VA, USA
- Steven P. Schinke, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
- Journal Prevention Science
- Online ISSN 1573-6695
- Print ISSN 1389-4986