[gov2001] dates

Hi gang, when you choose an article to replicate, try to choose one that is recent. 2-3 years is probably best. my publication, publication article says 4-5 years, but more recent is probably better; older probably is not. here's the reason: if there is another article that follows up on this one with better data, updated evidence, or better methods, then no matter how well you do your reviewers will mainly ask why you're not reacting to the new article. But suppose there is no newer paper that follows up on this one? In that case, reviewers may ask whether your "old" article is worth following up on if in "all these years" no one else has. That said, this is not a hard and fast rule. if you have a good reason -- a good way to avoid the referees saying this about you -- then its possible that it might well make good sense to pursue. See you tomorrow... Gary --- http://gking.harvard.edu