Brown, J. D. (2012). Writing up a replication report. In G. Keith. Porte (Ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics (pp. 173–197). Cambridge University Press.

In this book chapter, Brown outlines a typical structure for a replication report in the field of applied linguistics and explains what to write in each section. The field is multidisciplinary, including quantitative, mixed methods, and qualitative studies. Therefore the report is also flexible to accommodate different research methodologies and types of replications (exact, approximate, or conceptual). From Porte’s introductory chapter, an exact replication resembles a reproduction study, attempting to repeat the study with the same population, without altering any variables. An approximate replication attempts to exactly reproduce the methods without changing any significant variables while collecting new data. Conceptual replications use a new methodological design to verify the original findings.

The replication study, and by extension the report, requires the most information from the original report for the exact replication, and least for the conceptual replication. Replication of qualitative studies is motivated by establishing transferability through comparison of results, rather than establishing generalizability through confirmation of predicted outcomes. Brown’s suggested structure follows the typical scientific paper: introduction, method, results, discussion and conclusions.

Special considerations for replication reports include the audience and whether prior knowledge of the original study or its methods can be assumed, collegiality with regards to writing about the original authors and their research efforts, and the possibility to invite responses from the original authors. Authors should take care to report results of the original and replication studies without bias.