Epistemic diversity calls for a more diverse representation of scholarship when discussing reproducibility. For a long time, the discussion has been driven by quantitative research areas with the biomedical and psychological sciences spearheading the discussion. We would like to include the perspectives of researchers using other methodologies in our activities.
Concretely, we will continue to reach out to scholars from non-quantitative fields. This includes but is not limited to qualitative research, research in the humanities and participatory and applied research, which is often conducted at universities of applied science and applied science institutes. Please let us know if you hear of relevant venues to get in touch with researchers working with those methodologies.
Presentations on Reproducibility in Non-Quantitative Science and Scholarship by our steering group members and at our events:
Hans van Eyghen, Replication in History: Lessons learnt from a pilot study, Open Science Symposium Tilburg,05.09.2023, _slides
Pim Huijnen and Pieter Huistra, Walking through a circle of reproducibility in historiography, Keynote at the NLRN Symposium 2024, 06.12.24 _recording (from min. 37)
Hans van Eyghen, Reproducibility in (Digital) Humanities , Codecheck Event, Leiden, 14.2.2025_ slides
Latest Blogposts on Non-Quantitative Science and Scholarship:
- Making reproducibility work for qualitative research methods – and not the other way around.This blogpost is inspired by the Open Qualitative Research Symposium at VU on 28th March 2025. We thank the organizers and speakers for this interesting and energizing meeting. The blogpost is a summary of and reflection on some key issues that were raised during the event, how those relate to reproducibility in a broader context …
- The many dimensions of reproducible research:  A call to find your fellow advocates.  Blogpost by steering group member Tamarinde Haven. Various definitions of reproducibility and its sister concepts (replicability, replication) are floating around [Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences 2018, Goodman et al 2016]. Whereas there are relevant (disciplinary) differences between them, they generally share a focus on the technical parts of reproducible research. 

 With the …
- Replication in philosophy, or replicating data-free studies  Blog post by Hans Van Eyghen, Member of the NLRN steering group The replication crisis, which arose primarily in the biomedical and psychological sciences, was both a blessing for replications and somewhat of a curse. Its lasting impact lies in the recognition for the need for replicability. Replicability is now generally seen as a way …
Continue reading “Replication in philosophy, or replicating data-free studies  “