Search for: All records

An ongoing theme in this Reinforcing Reproducibility and Replicability column is the verification of reproducibility packages by institutions, see Butler (2023), Peer (2024), Pérignon (2024), and Jones (2024) for examples. In this present piece, Limor Peer and her co-author, Nicholas Ottone, build on their experience at the Institution for Social and Policy Studies at Yale University to not just provide guidance to authors (a sine-qua-non of any such recommendation), but also for those who will provide constructive comments, including post-publication updates, on efforts to reproduce replication packages. Ottone and Peer’s short piece describes the idea of a “curator note,” which can be added to already published replication packages at, well, “curated” deposits to enhance the future reproducibility for others. It is worth pointing out that many archives provide the ability for authors themselves to provide such notes, see for instance the American Economic Association’s Policy on Revisions of Data and Code Deposits. Students, researchers, and authors themselves should read Ottone’s and Peer’s recommendations.