![]() ![]() Faced with evidence of publication bias 4, 5, 6, 7, hindsight bias and selective reporting 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, insufficient sample sizes 16, inadequate data sharing 17 and suboptimal rates of both attempted 18, 19 and successful replication 20, 21, 22, researchers from across a broad range of fields are unifying around a core mission to improve reproducibility and transparency. We conclude that Registered Reports are promoting reproducibility, transparency and self-correction across disciplines and may help reshape how society evaluates research and researchers.Īfter more than a decade of meta-research and debate, the life and social sciences are well in the midst of a credibility revolution 1, 2, 3. We also consider how the policies and practices surrounding Registered Reports are changing, or must change in the future, to address limitations and adapt to new challenges. We review early evidence that Registered Reports are working as intended, while at the same time acknowledging that they are not a universal solution for irreproducibility. ![]() Here, we reflect on the history, progress and future prospects of the Registered Reports initiative and offer practical guidance for authors, reviewers and editors. ![]() By deciding which articles are published based on the question, theory and methods, Registered Reports offer a remedy for a range of reporting and publication biases. Registered Reports are a form of empirical publication in which study proposals are peer reviewed and pre-accepted before research is undertaken. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |