There must be an error here! Experimental evidence on coding errors' biases

Quantitative research relies heavily on coding, and coding errors are relatively common even in published research. In this paper, we examine whether individuals are more or less likely to check their code depending on the results they obtain. We test this hypothesis in a randomized experiment embedded in the recruitment process for research positions at a large international economic organization. In a coding task designed to assess candidates' programming abilities, we randomize whether participants obtain an expected or unexpected result if they commit a simple coding error. We find that individuals are almost 20% more likely to detect coding errors when they lead to unexpected results. This asymmetry in error detection depending on the results they generate suggests that coding errors may lead to biased findings in scientific research.

Publication Details

Journal
ArXiv.org
Published
2025-08-27
Primary Topic
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

There must be an error here! Experimental evidence on coding errors' biases

ArXiv.org
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
article

There must be an error here! Experimental evidence on coding errors' biases

article en

Abstract

Quantitative research relies heavily on coding, and coding errors are relatively common even in published research. In this paper, we examine whether individuals are more or less likely to check their code depending on the results they obtain. We test this hypothesis in a randomized experiment embedded in the recruitment process for research positions at a large international economic organization. In a coding task designed to assess candidates' programming abilities, we randomize whether participants obtain an expected or unexpected result if they commit a simple coding error. We find that individuals are almost 20% more likely to detect coding errors when they lead to unexpected results. This asymmetry in error detection depending on the results they generate suggests that coding errors may lead to biased findings in scientific research.

ArXiv.org
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

There must be an error here! Experimental evidence on coding errors' biases · ArXiv.org (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS