Submit a report

Announcements

We are recruiting recommenders (editors) from all research fields!

Your feedback matters! If you have authored or reviewed a Registered Report at Peer Community in Registered Reports, then please take 5 minutes to leave anonymous feedback about your experience, and view community ratings.

Latest recommendations

Id▲Title * Authors * Abstract * PictureThematic fields * RecommenderReviewersSubmission date
08 Nov 2024
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)
article picture

Dose-response of tDCS effects on motor learning and cortical excitability: a preregistered study

Increasing stimulation intensity does not affect motor learning

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by 1 anonymous reviewer
In neurostimulation research, the parameters of a stimulation protocol crucially impact on the effects of the stimulation. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neurostimulation technique that typically uses current intensities about 1-2 mA in human research to modulate motor and cognitive behavior. The current sham-controlled study by Hsu et al. (2024) applies current intensities not only of 2 mA but also of 4 mA and 6 mA and thus extends our understanding of stimulation parameters while ethical standards are preserved.
 
The influence of tDCS over the primary motor cortex was evaluated for neural plasticity during motor learning. Stimulation effects were tested not only behaviorally but also physiologically by motor evoked potentials elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). The presented pilot data were promising and underlined the feasibility of the proposed research design. The study contributes to tDCS research by uncovering reasons for controversial findings and thus increases reproducibility.
 
The results of the study unexpectedly revealed no stimulation effects on motor learning, neither for behavioral outcomes nor for physiological outcomes by motor evoked potentials. No evidence was found that stimulation effects linearly increase with increasing intensity. Interestingly, higher intensities were relatively well tolerated - but did not have any impact. The current findings underline the purpose of preregistrations and registered reports to act against publication bias, particulary in the field of neuromodulation. In the current case, failed replication and null findings - revealed by a methodologically sound study - are crucial to inform future research using similar stimulation protocols with the aim to modulate motor or cognitive behavior.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over one round of review. Based on ​detailed responses to reviewers’ and the recommender’s comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria and awarded a positive recommendation.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/jyuev
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 2. At least some data/evidence that was used to answer the research question had been accessed and partially observed by the authors prior to Stage 1 in-principle acceptance, but the authors certify that they had not yet observed the key variables within the data that were used to answer the research question.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
Hsu, G., Jafari, Z. H., Ahmed, A., Edwards, D. J., Cohen, L. G., & Parra, L. C. (2024). Dose-response of tDCS effects on motor learning and cortical excitability: a preregistered study [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 2.1 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/a42uy
Dose-response of tDCS effects on motor learning and cortical excitability: a preregistered studyGavin Hsu, Zhenous Hadi Jafari, Abdelrahman Ahmed, Dylan J. Edwards, Leonardo G. Cohen, Lucas C. Parra<p>​Background: Multiple studies have demonstrated that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) can influence corticospinal excitability and motor skill acquisition. However, the evidence for these effects i...Engineering, Medical SciencesChristina Artemenko2024-09-02 19:07:02 View
23 Jan 2025
STAGE 1

Mapping methodological variation in experience sampling research from design to data analysis: A systematic review

Methodological Variation in the Experience Sampling Methods: Can We Do ESM Better?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Priya Silverstein and 1 anonymous reviewer
The replication crisis/credibility revolution has driven a vast number of changes to our research environment (Korbmacher et al., 2023) including a much needed spotlight on issues surrounding measurement (Flake & Fried, 2020). As general understanding and awareness has increased surrounding the 'garden of forking paths' or 'researcher degrees of freedom' (Simmons et al., 2011), and the various decisions made during the scientific process that could impact the conclusions drawn by the process, so too should our interest in meta-research that tells us more about the methodological processes we follow, and how discretionary decisions may influence the design, analysis and reporting of a project.
 
Peeters et al. (2025) have proposed a systematic literature review of this nature, mapping the methodological variation in experience sampling methods (ESM) from the design stage all the way to dissemination. It starts this journey by mapping how ESM studies vary e.g., in design, considering a variety of factors like sample size, number of measurements, and sampling scheme. It also evaluates reporting quality, rationales provided, and captures the extent of open science practices adopted. Covering many parts of the research process that get assumed, unreported or otherwise unjustified, the proposed work looks set to springboard an important body of work that can tell us more effectively how to design, implement and report ESM studies.
 
The Stage 1 submission was reviewed over one round of in-depth review with two reviewers. Based on detailed responses to reviewers’ feedback, 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/ztvn3
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 1. At least some of the data/evidence that will be used to the answer the research question has been accessed and observed by the authors, including key variables, but the authors certify that they have not yet performed any of their preregistered analyses, and in addition they have taken stringent steps to reduce the risk of bias.
 
List of eligible PCI-RR-friendly journals:
 
References
 
1. Flake, J. K., & Fried, E. I. (2020). Measurement schmeasurement: Questionable measurement practices and how to avoid them. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3, 456-465. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920952393
 
2. Korbmacher, M., Azevedo, F., Pennington, C. R., Hartmann, H., Pownall, M., Schmidt, K., ... & Evans, T. (2023). The replication crisis has led to positive structural, procedural, and community changes. Communications Psychology, 1, 3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-023-00003-2
 
3. Peeters, L., Van Den Noortgate, W., Blanchard, M. A., Eisele, G., Kirtley, O., Artner, R., & Lafit, G. (2025). Mapping Methodological Variation in ESM Research from Design to Data Analysis: A Systematic Review. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/ztvn3
 
4. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359-1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632
Mapping methodological variation in experience sampling research from design to data analysis: A systematic reviewLisa Peeters, Wim Van Den Noortgate, M. Annelise Blanchard, Gudrun Eisele, Olivia Kirtley, Richard Artner, Ginette Lafit<p><strong>Aim</strong>. The Experience Sampling Method (ESM) has become a widespread tool to study time-varying constructs across many subfields of psychological and psychiatric research. This large variety in subfields of research and constructs...Social sciencesThomas Evans2024-09-04 10:39:37 View
29 Oct 2024
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Mechanisms of secularization: Testing between the rationalization and existential insecurity theories

Understanding links between secularization, rationalisation and insecurity

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by 1 anonymous reviewer
What relationship can be expected between secularization, rationalization and insecurity? While some authors argue that rationalization reduces the willingness to belong to religious groups, others have suggested that insecurity increases this need to belong to religious groups.
 
In the current study, Lang and Chvaja (2024) adjudicated between these two possibilities using an economics game with 811 participants from two countries: US and Poland. The central question posed by the authors is whether cooperative insecurity increases the probability of joining a religious normative group. They tested the relationship between an environment (secure and insecure) and institution (which related to the norm context: religious and secular) on the probability of choosing the normative group in an experimental setting.
 
The authors included an adequate power analysis, alternatives for non-supported hypotheses, and filtering to ensure a high quality of data collection. They also undertook a pilot study to ensure the quality of the procedure and sensitivity of the analyses. There were only a few, minor, and well documented deviations from stage 1.
 
For the non-religious group, secularity increased the odds of joining the normative group when faced with insecurity. For the religious group, the results were mixed, mostly due to the unexpected high rate of participants joining the religious group in the secure environment. The researchers then pooled the regular and reversed scenarii and found support for the existential insecurity theory.
 
The authors concluded that both theories (the rationalization theory and the existential insecurity theory) can be at work, as the majority of the sample did not choose the religious normative group due to a potential rationalization, but they do slightly more when faced with (existential) insecurity.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of review. Based on ​detailed responses to reviewers’ and the recommender’s comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria and therefore awarded a positive recommendation.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/yzgek
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that was used to answer the research question was generated until after IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1.Lang, M. & Chvaja, R. (2024). Mechanisms of secularization: Testing between the rationalization and existential insecurity theories [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/gy7sj
Mechanisms of secularization: Testing between the rationalization and existential insecurity theoriesMartin Lang, Radim Chvaja<p>The study tests two competing explanations of the secularization process related to rationalizing worldviews and decreasing existential insecurity. While the former explanation argues that people are unwilling to join religious groups because o...Humanities, Social sciencesAdrien Fillon2024-09-06 15:23:11 View
28 Jan 2025
STAGE 1

See me, judge me, pay me: Gendered effort moralization in work and care

A gender difference in effort moralization?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Jared Celniker and Vincent Kouassi
Effort moralization is the well known idea that, unrelated to actual performance, people doing more effort are judged better, attributed more morality and seen as better collaborators than people doing less effort. However, the series of studies on this topic mostly used vignettes with a man or a neutral protagonist. The current study by Roth et al. (2025) proposes to tackle the gender problem by testing the difference in attribution morality between a man and a woman protagonist, and two contexts: a “care” and a “work” context, mirroring the stereotypes associated with men and women.
 
The authors included two different and adequate power analyses, various interpretation of the possible effects, and filtering to ensure a high quality of data collection. They also provide a supplementary repository including the qualtrics survey, R script, and simulated data.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review. Based on ​detailed responses to the reviewers’ and the recommender’s 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/xd87r
 
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
 
Roth, L. H. O., Tissot, T. T., Fischer, T. & Masak, S. C. (2025). See me, judge me, pay me: Gendered effort moralization in work and care. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/xd87r
See me, judge me, pay me: Gendered effort moralization in work and careLeopold H. O. Roth, Tassilo T. Tissot, Thea Fischer, S. Charlotte Masak<p>The display of high effort at work is commonly rewarded with more positive moral judgements and increased cooperation partner attractiveness. This effect was shown to hold, even if higher effort is unrelated to better performance. Yet, current ...Social sciencesAdrien Fillon2024-09-09 15:12:30 View
28 Jan 2025
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Unveiling the Positivity Bias on Social Media: A Registered Experimental Study On Facebook, Instagram, And X

Social media positivity bias, or just positivity bias?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Marcel Martončik, Julius Klingelhoefer and 1 anonymous reviewer
Both research and public debates around social media use tend to involve a premise of positivity bias, which refers to presenting one’s life in an overly positive light by various different means. This premise contributes to multiple potentially important follow-up hypotheses, such as the fear of missing out and low self-image effects, due to repeated consumption of positive social media content (e.g., Bayer et al. 2020, for a review). The positivity bias of social media use, itself, has received limited research attention. 
 
In the present study, Masciantonio and colleagues (2025) tested positivity bias in the context of three social media platforms: Facebook, Instagram, and X. The experiment involved recruiting participants (n=312) into platform-specific user groups and crafting posts to be shared with friends as well as respective social media audiences. For social media positivity bias to differ from everyday positivity bias, posts in the former should introduce more positive valence in comparison to offline sharing—and if the platforms differ in their encouragement of positivity bias, they should introduce significant between-platform differences in valence.
 
Based on how the participants reported events, the study found no significant differences between everyday and social media positivity bias, but messages posted on Twitter/X had a more negative valence than posts in other social media platforms. The results would be consistent with the implication that people's positive actions in social media simply follow the natural human tendency to present oneself positively to others—a hypothesis that should be investigated in follow-up work. More research attention should also be given to specific design features, which may contribute to platform-specific differences in user habits, as suggested by the distinct valence rate found in relation to Twitter/X.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated by three experts (areas: experimental methods, social media, statistics) via in-depth peer review across two rounds, with one reviewer returning to validate analysis code and methdological accuracy on a final round. Based on the authors’ careful responses and revisions, the revised manuscript was judged to meet the Stage 2 criteria and was awarded a positive recommendation. 
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/9z6hm
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that was used to answer the research question was generated until after IPA.  
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1. Bayer, J. B., Triệu, P., & Ellison, N. B. (2020). Social media elements, ecologies, and effects. Annual review of psychology, 71, 471-497. https:// doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050944
 
2. Masciantonio, A., Heiser, N., & Cherbonnier, A. (2025). Unveiling the Positivity Bias on Social Media: A Registered Experimental Study On Facebook, Instagram, And X [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/s93yu 
Unveiling the Positivity Bias on Social Media: A Registered Experimental Study On Facebook, Instagram, And XAlexandra Masciantonio, Neele Heiser, Anthony Cherbonnier<p>Social media has transformed how people engage with the world around them. The positivity bias on social media, in particular, warrants in-depth investigation. This is particularly true as previous research has concentrated on one specific plat...Social sciencesVeli-Matti Karhulahti Marcel Martončik2024-09-23 11:20:07 View
29 Jan 2025
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Michotte's research on perceptual impressions of causality: a registered replication study

Michotte’s classic studies on the perception of causality: Replications, extensions and a sound base for further research

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Maxine Sherman and 1 anonymous reviewer
Making causal judgements are part of everyday life, whether seeking to understand the action of complex humans or the relations between inanimate objects in our environments. Albert Michotte’s (1963) classic book, The perception of causality, contained an extensive report of experiments demonstrating not only that observers perceive causality of inanimate shapes, but do so in manifold ways, creating different “causal impressions.” This work has been highly influential across psychology and neuroscience. 
 
In the current study, White (2025) conducted 14 experiments aimed at replicating and extending Michotte’s work. Despite the fact that this research is foundational to current work on perception and understanding of causal relations, it has never been subject to rigorous replication. Moreover, like many research studies from that era, Michotte was sparse on details about methodology and did not rely on statistical analysis. White carried out an ambitious set of 14 experiments and 18 hypotheses that directly replicated and, in some cases, extended Michotte’s experiments. The results of the experiments were mixed, with the hypotheses evenly divided among being supported, partially supported, and not supported. The current effort by White not only brings rigorous contemporary data to classic studies of perceptual impressions of causality, but the results point to important new directions for future study on the topic. In particular, the findings suggest a need to broaden our investigations of causal explanations of movement beyond launching (i.e., contact of one object leading to motion of another) to also consider entraining (i.e., joint movement following contact) and pulling. The collected studies provide fertile ground for further testing a variety of mechanisms that explain different perceptual impressions of causality. 
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over three rounds of in-depth review, the first two rounds consisting of detailed comments from two reviewers and the third round consisting of a close read by the recommender. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria and awarded a positive recommendation.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/5jx8f
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that was used to answer the research question was generated until after IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI-RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1. Michotte, A. (1963). The perception of causality (T. R. Miles & E. Miles, trans.). London: Methuen. (English translation of Michotte, 1954). 
 
2. White, P. A. (2025). Michotte's research on perceptual impressions of causality: A registered replication study [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/jdac7
Michotte's research on perceptual impressions of causality: a registered replication studyPeter A. White<p>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Michotte (1946/1954/1963) showed that visual impressions of causality can occur in perception of simple animations of moving geometrical objects. In the launching effect, one object is perceived a...Social sciencesMoin Syed2024-10-07 10:53:33 View
11 Feb 2025
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Do Ecological Valid Stop Signals Aid Detour Performance? A Comparison of Four Bird Species

What is the role of sensory perception in cognitive task performance? An improved replication of detour performance in four different bird species

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Christian Nawroth and 1 anonymous reviewer
The detour task, where an individual has to go around a see-through barrier in order to reach a goal, is one of the oldest paradigms used in animal cognition research (Kabadayi et al. 2018). While these previous tests have documented variation in the ability of animals to inhibit going straight for the visible reward, the cognitive underpinnings of this behaviour are as yet not fully understood. In the current study, Dewulf et al. (2025) assessed one of the specific cognitive processes that might be involved in this behaviour, the ability to identify the transparent object as a barrier. Through experimental procedures relying on large samples of individuals from four bird species, they compared the role of signal detection in inhibitory response performance in a detour task. The authors found that, unlike suggested in previous work with these four species (Regolin et al. 1994, Zucca et al. 2005), changing the markings on the barriers to potentially better match those experienced by individuals in their natural environments did not improve their performance. Nevertheless, the detailed further explorations suggest that in order to understand variation in how quickly individuals and species solve the detour task, it is important to consider that different cognitive processes are involved. Their work therefore provides a basis to better understand and further investigate why species might differ in their performance in the detour task.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review, the first round consisting of detailed comments from two reviewers and the second round consisting of a close read by the recommender. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria and awarded a positive recommendation.
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that was used to answer the research question was generated until after IPA.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/qvxgh
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1. Dewulf, A., Garcia-Co, C., Müller, W., Madden, J.R., Martel, A., Lens, L. & Verbruggen, F. (2025). Do Ecological Valid Stop Signals Aid Detour Performance? A Comparison of Four Bird Species [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/j2k9h
 
2. Kabadayi, C., Bobrowicz, K., & Osvath, M. (2018). The detour paradigm in animal cognition. Animal Cognition, 21, 21-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1152-0
 
3. Regolin, L., Vallortigara, G., & Zanforlin, M. (1995). Object and spatial representations in detour problems by chicks. Animal Behaviour, 49, 195-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(95)80167-7
 
4. Zucca, P., Antonelli, F., & Vallortigara, G. (2005). Detour behaviour in three species of birds: quails (Coturnix sp.), herring gulls (Larus cachinnans) and canaries (Serinus canaria). Animal Cognition, 8, 122-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-004-0243-x
Do Ecological Valid Stop Signals Aid Detour Performance? A Comparison of Four Bird SpeciesAnneleen Dewulf, Clara Garcia-Co, Wendt Müller, Joah R. Madden, An Martel, Luc Lens, Frederick Verbruggen<p>Response inhibition, or the stopping of actions, is considered a key component of flexible and adaptive behaviour. Across fields, response inhibition is often treated as a unitary cognitive mechanism. However, we propose that response inhibitio...Life Sciences, Social sciencesDieter Lukas2024-10-22 14:00:30 View
11 Feb 2025
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Action interpretation determines the effects of go/no-go and approach/avoidance actions on food choice

Does interpretation of actions as either avoid or inhibit influence choice behaviour for candy?

Recommended by based on reviews by Alexander MacLellan and Katrijn Houben
Experimental research demonstrates that executing or inhibiting motor responses (or approaching / avoiding) towards a stimulus can alter the valuation of the stimulus (Yang et al., 2022). There are competing theories as to the proposed mechanisms of value change, such as increased response conflict or prediction errors (Houben & Aulbach, 2023). However, research has mostly examined response execution/inhibition and approach/avoidance in isolation and the few studies that have examined these together have focused on stimulus evaluation as an outcome.
 
In the current study Chen et al. (2025) set out to examine how action interpretations (e.g. go vs approach) can impact individuals food-choices. This is important for cognitive bias modification approaches which aim to manipulate these actions to promote behaviour change (Iannazzo et al., 2024; Veling et al., 2021), but also theoretical accounts which suggest certain motor-responses acquire valence. Here there are two groups randomised to receive instructions to either go/no-go or approach/avoid images of candy in novel training task (Chen et al., 2019).
 
The results of the experiment suggested that despite both groups making the same responses (pressing a space bar vs not), the framing of the response as go vs approach and no-go vs avoidance influenced subsequent food-choice (i.e. responses framed as approach increased the probability of choosing approach items over avoidance items, but not go items over no-go items).
 
As the authors state, these findings cast doubt on theoretical models which suggest there are ‘hardwired’ links between specific go/approach responses and appetitive systems or specific no-go/avoidance responses and aversive systems. They also suggest these responses aren’t valenced, but acquire valence through interpretation of the action. These findings can also inform future studies into cognitive bias modification.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review by two reviewers with expertise in the relevant area, who also assessed the Stage 1 manuscript. Based on the authors’ careful responses and revisions, the revised manuscript was judged to meet the Stage 2 criteria and was awarded a positive recommendation.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/bn5xa
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that was used to answer the research question was generated until after IPA. 
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
 References
 
1. Chen, Z., Van Dessel, P., Serverius, J., Zhu, D. & Figner, B. (2025). Action interpretation determines the effects of go/no-go and approach/avoidance actions on food choice. Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/6xhw4_v2
 
2. Chen, Z., & Van Dessel, P. (2024). Action Interpretation Determines the Effects of Go/No-Go and Approach/Avoidance Actions on Stimulus Evaluation. Open Mind, 8, 898–923. https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00151
 
3. Houben, K. and Aulbach, M. (2023). Is there a difference between stopping and avoiding? A review of the mechanisms underlying Go/No-Go and Approach-Avoidance training for food choice. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 49, 101245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2022.101245

4. Iannazzo, L. H., Hayden, M. J., Lawrence, N. S., Kakoschke, N., Hughes, L. K., Van Egmond, K., … Staiger, P. K. (2024). Inhibitory control training to reduce appetitive behaviour: a meta-analytic investigation of effectiveness, potential moderators, and underlying mechanisms of change. Health Psychology Review, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2024.2410018
 
5. Veling, H., Verpaalen, I. A. M., Liu, H., Mosannenzadeh, F., Becker, D., & Holland, R. W. (2021). How can food choice best be trained? Approach-avoidance versus go/no-go training. Appetite, 163, 105226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105226
 
6. Yang, Y., Qi, L., Morys, F., Wu, Q. & Chen, H. (2022). Food-Specific Inhibition Training for Food Devaluation: A Meta-Analysis. Nutrients, 14, 1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14071363
Action interpretation determines the effects of go/no-go and approach/avoidance actions on food choiceZhang Chen, Pieter Van Dessel, Jordi Serverius, Daxun Zhu, Bernd Figner<p>Executing go/no-go and approach/avoidance responses toward objects can increase people's choices of go over no-go items, and of approach over avoidance items. Some theoretical accounts explain these effects as the results of merely executing th...Social sciencesAndrew Jones2024-11-24 11:21:55 View
14 Jan 2025
STAGE 1
article picture

Implementing a rapid geographic range expansion - the role of behavior and habitat changes

The role of behavior and habitat availability on species geographic expansion

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO
Note from the PCI RR Managing Board: This Stage 1 recommendation was originally written by Esther Sebastián González for PCI Ecology on 06 Oct 2020 and was transferred to PCI Registered Reports on 14 Jan 2025 to facilitate the submission and evaluation of the resulting Stage 2 submissions. The link to the original recommendation and review history at PCI Ecology may be found at this link (and in PDF format here).
 
===
 
Understanding the relative importance of species-specific traits and environmental factors in modulating species distributions is an intriguing question in ecology [1]. Both behavioral flexibility (i.e., the ability to change the behavior in changing circumstances) and habitat availability are known to influence the ability of a species to expand its geographic range [2,3]. However, the role of each factor is context and species dependent and more information is needed to understand how these two factors interact. In this pre-registration, Logan et al. [4] explain how they will use Great-tailed grackles (Quiscalus mexicanus), a species with a flexible behavior and a rapid geographic range expansion, to evaluate the relative role of habitat and behavior as drivers of the species’ expansion [4]. The authors present very clear hypotheses, predicted results and also include alternative predictions. The rationales for all the hypotheses are clearly stated, and the methodology (data and analyses plans) are described with detail. The large amount of information already collected by the authors for the studied species during previous projects warrants the success of this study. It is also remarkable that the authors will make all their data available in a public repository, and that the pre-registration in already stored in GitHub, supporting open access and reproducible science. I agree with the three reviewers of this pre-registration about its value and I think its quality has largely improved during the review process. Thus, I am happy to recommend it and I am looking forward to seeing the results.
 
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 1. At least some of the data/evidence that will be used to the answer the research question has been accessed and observed by the authors, including key variables, but the authors certify that they have not yet performed any of their preregistered analyses, and in addition they have taken stringent steps to reduce the risk of bias.
 
List of eligible PCI-RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
[1] Gaston KJ. 2003. The structure and dynamics of geographic ranges. Oxford series in Ecology and Evolution. Oxford University Press, New York.
 
[2] Sol D, Lefebvre L. 2000. Behavioural flexibility predicts invasion success in birds introduced to new zealand. Oikos. 90(3): 599–605. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.900317.x
 
[3] Hanski I, Gilpin M. 1991. Metapopulation dynamics: Brief history and conceptual domain. Biological journal of the Linnean Society. 42(1-2): 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1991.tb00548.x
 
[4] Logan CJ, McCune KB, Chen N, Lukas D. 2020. Implementing a rapid geographic range expansion - the role of behavior and habitat changes (http://corinalogan.com/Preregistrations/gxpopbehaviorhabitat.html) In principle acceptance by PCI Ecology of the version on 16 Dec 2021 https://github.com/corinalogan/grackles/blob/0fb956040a34986902a384a1d8355de65010effd/Files/Preregistrations/gxpopbehaviorhabitat.Rmd
 
=======
 
Full review history: [link]
 
Implementing a rapid geographic range expansion - the role of behavior and habitat changesCorina J Logan, Kelsey B McCune, Nancy Chen, Dieter Lukas<p>It is generally thought that behavioral flexibility, the ability to change behavior when circumstances change, plays an important role in the ability of a species to rapidly expand their geographic range (Chow et al., 2016; Griffin &amp; Guez, ...Life SciencesChris Chambers2025-01-13 12:12:15 View