Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability
| Autor(a) principal: | |
|---|---|
| Data de Publicação: | 2024 |
| Outros Autores: | , , , |
| Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
| Idioma: | eng |
| Título da fonte: | Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
| Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7836 |
Resumo: | Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are an effective way of mapping a research field and synthesizing research evidence. However, especially in communication research, SLRs often include diverse theories and methods, which come with a considerable downside in terms of reproducibility and replicability. As a response to this problem, the present article introduces the method of standardized sampling for systematic literature reviews (STAMP). The method is a structured, four-stage approach that is centered around score-based screening decisions. Originating from principles of standardized content analysis, a method common in communication research, and supplementing established guidelines like Cochrane or PRISMA, the STAMP method contributes to more transparent, reproducible, and replicable SLR sampling processes. As we illustrate throughout the article, the method is adaptable to various SLR types. The article also discusses the method’s limitations, such as potential coder effects and comparatively high resource intensity. To facilitate the application of STAMP, we provide a comprehensive guideline via the Open Science Framework that offers a succinct overview for quick reference and includes practical examples for different types of SLRs. |
| id |
RCAP_8e28300238dd1db6a0dbcdbe2279c83d |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/7836 |
| network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
| network_name_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
| repository_id_str |
https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160 |
| spelling |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicabilitycontent analysis; replicability; reproducibility; STAMP method; standardized sampling; systematic literature reviewSystematic literature reviews (SLRs) are an effective way of mapping a research field and synthesizing research evidence. However, especially in communication research, SLRs often include diverse theories and methods, which come with a considerable downside in terms of reproducibility and replicability. As a response to this problem, the present article introduces the method of standardized sampling for systematic literature reviews (STAMP). The method is a structured, four-stage approach that is centered around score-based screening decisions. Originating from principles of standardized content analysis, a method common in communication research, and supplementing established guidelines like Cochrane or PRISMA, the STAMP method contributes to more transparent, reproducible, and replicable SLR sampling processes. As we illustrate throughout the article, the method is adaptable to various SLR types. The article also discusses the method’s limitations, such as potential coder effects and comparatively high resource intensity. To facilitate the application of STAMP, we provide a comprehensive guideline via the Open Science Framework that offers a succinct overview for quick reference and includes practical examples for different types of SLRs.Cogitatio Press2024-04-03info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7836https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7836Media and Communication; Vol 12 (2024): Reproducibility and Replicability in Communication Research2183-243910.17645/mac.i429reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/7836https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/7836/3717Copyright (c) 2024 Ayanda Rogge, Luise Anter, Deborah Kunze, Kristin Pomsel, Gregor Willenbrockinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessRogge, AyandaAnter, LuiseKunze, DeborahPomsel, KristinWillenbrock, Gregor2024-06-20T17:45:15Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/7836Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T17:55:54.535903Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability |
| title |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability |
| spellingShingle |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability Rogge, Ayanda content analysis; replicability; reproducibility; STAMP method; standardized sampling; systematic literature review |
| title_short |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability |
| title_full |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability |
| title_fullStr |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability |
| title_sort |
Standardized Sampling for Systematic Literature Reviews (STAMP Method): Ensuring Reproducibility and Replicability |
| author |
Rogge, Ayanda |
| author_facet |
Rogge, Ayanda Anter, Luise Kunze, Deborah Pomsel, Kristin Willenbrock, Gregor |
| author_role |
author |
| author2 |
Anter, Luise Kunze, Deborah Pomsel, Kristin Willenbrock, Gregor |
| author2_role |
author author author author |
| dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Rogge, Ayanda Anter, Luise Kunze, Deborah Pomsel, Kristin Willenbrock, Gregor |
| dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
content analysis; replicability; reproducibility; STAMP method; standardized sampling; systematic literature review |
| topic |
content analysis; replicability; reproducibility; STAMP method; standardized sampling; systematic literature review |
| description |
Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are an effective way of mapping a research field and synthesizing research evidence. However, especially in communication research, SLRs often include diverse theories and methods, which come with a considerable downside in terms of reproducibility and replicability. As a response to this problem, the present article introduces the method of standardized sampling for systematic literature reviews (STAMP). The method is a structured, four-stage approach that is centered around score-based screening decisions. Originating from principles of standardized content analysis, a method common in communication research, and supplementing established guidelines like Cochrane or PRISMA, the STAMP method contributes to more transparent, reproducible, and replicable SLR sampling processes. As we illustrate throughout the article, the method is adaptable to various SLR types. The article also discusses the method’s limitations, such as potential coder effects and comparatively high resource intensity. To facilitate the application of STAMP, we provide a comprehensive guideline via the Open Science Framework that offers a succinct overview for quick reference and includes practical examples for different types of SLRs. |
| publishDate |
2024 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2024-04-03 |
| dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| format |
article |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7836 https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7836 |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7836 |
| dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
| language |
eng |
| dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/7836 https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/7836/3717 |
| dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2024 Ayanda Rogge, Luise Anter, Deborah Kunze, Kristin Pomsel, Gregor Willenbrock info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2024 Ayanda Rogge, Luise Anter, Deborah Kunze, Kristin Pomsel, Gregor Willenbrock |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio Press |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio Press |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Media and Communication; Vol 12 (2024): Reproducibility and Replicability in Communication Research 2183-2439 10.17645/mac.i429 reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia instacron:RCAAP |
| instname_str |
FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
| instacron_str |
RCAAP |
| institution |
RCAAP |
| reponame_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
| collection |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
info@rcaap.pt |
| _version_ |
1833597065360310272 |