An interviewee in an intelligence interview can face competing interests in disclosing information: The value in cooperating because, for example, information given leads to the arrest of a narcotics gang, making the neighbourhood safer; and the risk that disclosing the information leads to reprisals from the gang. Different pieces of information will compete with each other for disclosure, depending on this balance of risks to self-interest. According to the disclosure-outcomes management model of Neequaye et al., information will be disclosed more with a high than low probability of reward, as might be straightforwardly expected, but this difference will be larger when there is a low probability of cost rather than a high probability. The high probability of cost will induce more a variable response to the possible benefits.

Neequaye et al. (2023) will invite participants to assume the role of an informant, with the goal of maximizing their points according to stated probabilities of costs and benefits of disclosing pieces of information relating to given scenarios. Then the degree to which each type of information is disclosed in a subsequent interview will be assessed: this way the crucial interaction can be tested.

 

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over one round of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and therefore awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).

 

Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:

 

 

 

Neequaye, D. A., Luke, T. J., & Kollback, K. (2023). Managing Disclosure Outcomes in Intelligence Interviews, in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/ru8j5

Sleep and reward each have an important role in human memory. According to the active system consolidation hypothesis, memory consolidation during sleep originates from the repeated reactivation of memory representations that were encoded during wake (Rasch & Born, 2013). Research has also consistently shown that memory performance is enhanced for items or stimuli associated with higher vs. lower rewards. While these lines of evidence are relatively clear, the role of sleep in shaping the interaction between reward and memory is more opaque, likely due to a combination of methodological variation between studies but also due to the field’s reliance on small-N designs and biased reporting practices. Clarifying this three-way relationship, and setting field benchmarks for effect sizes, is crucial not only for building richer neurocognitive models of memory, but for clinical applications such as targeted sleep interventions to treat addiction and other forms of mental illness. 

 

Using a large, stratified online German sample (N=1750), Morgan et al. (2022) will study the three-way relationship between sleep, reward and memory by asking whether, and if so how, reward influences the magnitude of sleep-dependent memory consolidation. Using an AM:PM-PM:AM design in combination with a motivated learning task, the authors will address three main questions: first, whether sleep yields greater memory performance compared to an equivalent period of wake; second whether information associated with higher reward leads to greater memory performance compared to lower reward; and third, the crucial interaction of whether sleep causes greater recognition memory performance for higher vs. lower reward items. The design also includes a series of rigorous positive controls to confirm testability of the hypotheses, while measuring a host of additional moderating variables for exploratory analyses (including age, education status, mental health, and more).

 

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and therefore awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/q5pk8
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA. 
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 

 

1. Rasch, B. & Born, J. (2013). About Sleep's Role in Memory. Physiological Revews, 93, 681–766. https://doi.org/10.1152%2Fphysrev.00032.2012

 

2. Morgan, D. P., Nagel, J., Cagatay Gürsoy, N., Kern, S. & Feld, G. B. (2022). Estimating the effect of reward on sleep-dependent memory consolidation – A Registered Report, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/q5pk8

The relationship between music and exercise has been studied for over a century, with implications for our understanding of biomechanics, physiology, brain function, and psychology. Listening to music while exercising is associated with a wide range of benefits, from increasing motivation, to reducing perceived exertion, inhibiting awareness of negative bodily signals, boosting mood, and ultimately improving physical performance. But while these ergogenic benefits of music are well documented, much remains to be discovered about how music alters brain function during exercise. One reason for this gap in understanding is the technical difficulty in recording brain activity during realistic exercise, as neuroimaging methods such as fMRI, EEG or MEG typically require participants to remain as still as possible.

 

In the current study, Guérin et al. (2023) will use the optical brain imaging technique of functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to measure oxygenation of key brain areas during exercise. Unlike other neuroimaging methods, fNIRS has a high tolerance for motion artefacts, making it the ideal method of choice for the current investigation. The authors propose a series of hypotheses based on previous studies that observed a decrease in cerebral oxygenation during intense exercise, particularly within the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). If, as suggested, the prefrontal cortex is important for regulation of cognition and emotion during exercise, then the benefits of listening to music might arise by delaying or reducing this drop in prefrontal oxygenation.

 

Using a within-subject designs, Guérin et al. will combine an incremental exercise protocol involving a cycling task with three auditory conditions: asynchronous music (the active condition), listening to an audiobook (an auditory control) or silence (baseline control). Compared to the two control conditions, they predict that music exposure will increase oxygenation in prefrontal and parietal regions and will also delay the drop in oxygenation associated with intense exercise (specifically within dlPFC and mPFC). To test whether any such changes are specific for prefrontal and parietal cortex, they will also compare the haemodynamic responses of the occipital cortex between the auditory conditions, predicting no difference.

 

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and therefore awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/52aeb
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 

Visual symmetry is critical to our interaction with our environment so that when detected, symmetry automatically produces a neural marker in the form of an Event Related Potential (ERP) called Sustained Posterior Negativity (SPN). However, when symmetry is presented to the visual system slanted away from the viewer, there is a reduction in SPN, termed a perspective cost. 

 

Considering ​objects are rarely presented front-on (or frontoparallel) in our natural environment, Karakashevska et al., (2023) plan to examine the extent of the perspective cost with the addition of visual cues to facilitate extraretinal representation of the visual symmetry. The authors will record electroencephalography (EEG) from 120 participants while they perform a luminance task on symmetrical and asymmetrical stimuli. The authors hypothesize perspective cost will be reduced by three perspective cues: 1) monocular viewing, when cue conflict caused by binocular viewing is eliminated, 2) a static frame surrounding the symmetrical stimulus, adding a depth cue, and 3) a moving frame, assisting 3D perception prior to the symmetry onset. If the SPN is equivalent during frontoparallel and slanted presentation in a cue condition, the authors will conclude extraretinal representation can be automatic when sufficient visual cues are available. The proposed experiment is powered to detect a relatively small difference between perspective cue conditions. This will solidify fundamental research on visual symmetry processing and will further our understanding of object perception and recognition. 

 

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over three rounds by four expert reviewers. Following in-depth review and responses from the authors, the recommenders have determined that Stage 1 criteria was met and have awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA). 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/yzsq5
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI-RR-friendly journals:
 

• Advances in Cognitive Psychology
• Brain and Neuroscience Advances
• Cortex
• F1000Research
• Imaging Neuroscience
• In&Vertebrates
• NeuroImage: Reports
• Peer Community Journal
• PeerJ
• Royal Society Open Science
• Studia Psychologica
• Swiss Psychology Open

 
References
 
1. Karakashevska, E., Bertamini, M. & Makin, A. D. J. (2023). Putting things into perspective: Which visual cues facilitate automatic extraretinal symmetry representation? [Stage 1 Registered Report]. In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/yzsq5

In the past two decades, most academic fields have witnessed an open science revolution that has led to significant increases in open access publishing, reproducibility efforts, and scientific transparency in general (e.g., Spellman et al. 2018). One of the key areas in this ongoing change is data sharing. Although some evidence already points at progress in data sharing practices, many new datasets remain unshared (see Tedersoo et al. 2021).
 
In the present registered report, Henderson et al. (2023) empirically explore the factors that either hinder or facilitate data sharing in the UK. By means of semi-structured interviews, the team will chart researchers’ experiences of sharing and non-sharing. Thematic template analysis will be applied to organise the data into a hierarchical map of capabilities, opportunities, and motivations in a theoretical domains framework (COM-B-TDF). The research plan itself meets the highest open science standards and reflects on the authors own positions, from which the current qualitative interview data sharing efforts will be made.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was reviewed over three rounds by three experts with familiary of the UK cultural context and specializations in open science practices, qualitative research, and data infrastructures. Based on careful revisions and detailed responses to the reviewers’ comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and therefore awarded in-principle acceptance.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/2gm5s (under temporary private embargo)
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA.  
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:

 

 

References
 
1. Henderson, E., Marcu, A., Atkins, L. & Farran, E.K. (2023). Investigating the barriers and enablers to data sharing behaviours: A qualitative Registered Report. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/2gm5s

 

2. Spellman, B. A., Gilbert, E. A. & Corker, K. S. (2018). Open Science. Stevens' Handbook of Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 1-47. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119170174.epcn519

 

3. Tedersoo, L., Küngas, R., Oras, E., Köster, K., Eenmaa, H., Leijen, Ä., ... & Sepp, T. (2021). Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines. Scientific data, 8, 192. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00981-0