Submit a report

Announcements

Please note: To accommodate reviewer and recommender holiday schedules, we will be closed to submissions from 1st July — 1st September. During this time, reviewers will be able to submit reviews and recommenders will issue decisions, but no new or revised submissions can be made by authors. The one exception to this rule is that authors using the scheduled track who submit their initial Stage 1 snapshot prior to 1st July can choose a date within the shutdown period to submit their full Stage 1 manuscript.

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 recommendationsrssmastodon

IdTitleAuthorsAbstractPictureThematic fieldsRecommenderReviewers▲Submission date
13 Nov 2023
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Convenience Samples and Measurement Equivalence in Replication Research

Data from students and crowdsourced online platforms do not often measure the same thing

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Benjamin Farrar and Shinichi Nakagawa

Comparative research is how evidence is generated to support or refute broad hypotheses (e.g., Pagel 1999). However, the foundations of such research must be solid if one is to arrive at the correct conclusions. Determining the external validity (the generalizability across situations/individuals/populations) of the building blocks of comparative data sets allows one to place appropriate caveats around the robustness of their conclusions (Steckler & McLeroy 2008).

In the current study, Alley and colleagues (2023) tackled the external validity of comparative research that relies on subjects who are either university students or participating in experiments via an online platform. They determined whether data from these two types of subjects have measurement equivalence - whether the same trait is measured in the same way across groups.

Although they use data from studies involved in the Many Labs replication project to evaluate this question, their results are of crucial importance to other comparative researchers whose data are generated from these two sources (students and online crowdsourcing). The authors show that these two types of subjects do not often have measurement equivalence, which is a warning to others to evaluate their experimental design to improve validity. They provide useful recommendations for researchers on how to to implement equivalence testing in their studies, and they facilitate the process by providing well annotated code that is openly available for others to use.

After one round of review and revision, 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/7gtvf
 
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 IPA, but the authors certify that they had not yet observed the key variables within the data that were used to answer the research question AND they took additional steps to maximise bias control and rigour.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1. Pagel, M. (1999). Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature, 401, 877-884. https://doi.org/10.1038/44766
 
2. Steckler, A. & McLeroy, K. R. (2008). The importance of external validity. American Journal of Public Health 98, 9-10. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2007.126847
 
3. Alley L. J., Axt, J., & Flake J. K. (2023). Convenience Samples and Measurement Equivalence in Replication Research [Stage 2 Registered Report] Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports​. https://osf.io/s5t3v
Convenience Samples and Measurement Equivalence in Replication ResearchLindsay J. Alley, Jordan Axt, Jessica Kay Flake<p>A great deal of research in psychology employs either university student or online crowdsourced convenience samples (Chandler &amp; Shapiro, 2016; Strickland &amp; Stoops, 2019) and there is evidence that these groups differ in meaningful ways ...Social sciencesCorina Logan Alison Young Reusser2023-08-31 20:26:43 View
19 Jun 2024
STAGE 1
article picture

Culture-Driven Neural Plasticity and Imprints of Body-Movement Pace on Musical Rhythm Processing

The interplay of music, movement, and culture on rhythm processing

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Anne Keitel and 1 anonymous reviewer
The interplay of music, movement, and cultural experience shapes rhythm perception. From bouncing babies and children at play, to tapping, clapping, and dancing, music often triggers synchronous body movements that can influence how we process rhythm. And, at the same time, long-term exposure to specific musical traditions shapes how we perceive and interpret rhythms.
 
However, direct behavioural and neuroscientific evidence on how these processes occur remains scarce. In this programmatic submission, comprising two complementary Stage 2 reports, Guérin et al. (2024) will investigate how body movements shape the processing of auditory information, and how previous short-term motor practice and long-term cultural experience interact to shape neural and behavioural responses to rhythmic stimuli. The authors will record in separate sessions both  electroencephalography (EEG) and hand clapping, in response to rhythms from West/Central Africa. These recordings will be conducted before and after a session in which participants will clap/step to either a three or a four-beat metre that is expected to influence how they interpret a rhythm.
 
The first Stage 2 report, which will be conducted on African-enculturated participants, aims to demonstrate how body-movement pace flexibly imprints on human sensory processing. The authors build on various theoretical models that emphasise the role of motor production in metre perception, and predict that both neural and behavioural entrainment will improve following movement, matching the rhythmic pattern set by the previous body movements.
 
The second Stage 2 report aims to uncover how short-term motor practice and long-term cultural experience interact to shape responses to rhythmic stimuli, by integrating short-term motor practice and long-term cultural experience. For this, the authors will test separate groups of participants from distinct cultural backgrounds (African vs. Western-enculturated), which are predicted to show neural and behavioural differences in their preferred metric mapping before body movement, and expect that neural and behavioural entrainment will improve after movement, especially for the metre set by prior movements, and more significantly for the metre common in the participant's culture.
 
Together, the findings from the planned Stage 2 reports are expected to clarify how long-term cultural background and short-term motor practice imprint onto rhythm processing in humans. This research will enhance our understanding of how cultural experience, body movement, and neural plasticity interact in music processing.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over three rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' and recommender's comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/skuyc
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. Data collection commenced during the later part of Stage 1 peer review; however, since no changes to the design were made after this point, the risk of bias due to prior data observation remains zero and the manuscript therefore qualifies for Level 6.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
References
 
Guérin, S. M. R., Coulon, E., Lenc, T., Polak, R., Keller, P. E., & Nozaradan, S. (2024). Culture-Driven Neural Plasticity and Imprints of Body-Movement Pace on Musical Rhythm Processing. In principle acceptance of Version 2.1 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/skuyc
Culture-Driven Neural Plasticity and Imprints of Body-Movement Pace on Musical Rhythm ProcessingSégolène M. R. Guérin, Emmanuel Coulon, Tomas Lenc, Rainer Polak, Peter E. Keller, Sylvie Nozaradan<p>The proposed programmatic registered report aims at capturing direct neuroscientific evidence for the rhythmic, movement-related shaping of auditory information with a cross-cultural perspective. Specifically, West/Central African- and Western-...Life SciencesJuan David LeongómezAnonymous2023-11-30 11:36:06 View
09 Feb 2023
STAGE 1

The Medusa effect: A registered replication report of Will, Merritt, Jenkins, and Kingstone (2021)

Looking (again) at Medusa: does pictorial abstraction influence mind perception?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Alan Kingstone, Brittany Cassidy and 3 anonymous reviewers
The Medusa effect is a recently described phenomenon in which people judge a person to be more mindful when they appear as a picture than as a picture within a picture. Across a series of experiments, Will et al. (2021) reported that at higher levels of abstraction, images of people were judged lower in realness (how real the person seemed), experience (the ability to feel) and agency (the ability to plan and act), and also benefited less from prosocial behaviour. The findings provide an intriguing window into mind perception – the extent to which we attribute minds and mental capacities to others.
 
In the current study, Han et al. (2023) propose a close replication of two experiments from the original report by Will et al. (2021), asking first, whether the level of pictorial abstraction influences ratings of realness, agency and experience, and second, whether it also influences prosocial behaviour as measured in the dictator game (with participants predicted to allocate more money to recipients presented as pictures than as pictures within pictures). In the event of a non-replication using the original materials, the authors will further repeat the experiments using newly generated stimuli that are better matched for cultural context and more tightly controlled along various dimensions.
 
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/xj46z
 
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. Will, P., Merritt, E., Jenkins, R., & Kingstone, A. (2021). The Medusa effect reveals levels of mind perception in pictures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(32), e2106640118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2106640118
 
2. Han, J., Zhang, M., Liu, J., Song, Y. & Yamada, Y. (2023).The Medusa effect: A registered replication report of Will, Merritt, Jenkins, and Kingstone (2021), in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/xj46z
The Medusa effect: A registered replication report of Will, Merritt, Jenkins, and Kingstone (2021) Jing Han, Minjun Zhang, Jiaxin Liu, Yu Song, Yuki Yamada<div>The medusa effect refers to the tendency of people to evaluate a "picture of a person" as more mindful than a "picture of a picture of a person". This phenomenon is strikingly intriguing because it suggests that when people evaluate the human...Social sciencesChris ChambersAnonymous, Alan Kingstone, Anonymous, Anonymous2022-08-18 09:50:35 View
28 Mar 2024
STAGE 1

Working memory performance in adverse environments: Enhanced, impaired, or intact?

A closer look at working memory changing with adversity

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Kathryn Bates and 1 anonymous reviewer
Adverse environments involving threat, uncertainty, deprivation and stress can cause significant and long-lasting harm to cognition and development. In this Stage 1 protocol, Vermeent and colleagues (2024) aim to simultaneously test with a single paradigm and statistical model for findings from previous studies showing that human working memory capacity is impaired in adverse environments, as well as other evidence suggesting that adversity may actually enhance updating of working memory. Furthermore, they will also investigate whether working memory is related to each of the adversity types: threat, deprivation, and unpredictability.
 
The findings of this study should help clarify how working memory functions in combination with adversity, and will provide insight into the development of better interventions and training methods for optimal performance in a variety of environments.
 
The manuscript was reviewed by two experts and the recommender. Following two rounds of peer review, and based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, I, 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/dp7wc
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 3. At least some data/evidence that will be used to the answer the research question has been previously accessed by the authors (e.g. downloaded or otherwise received), but the authors certify that they have not yet observed ANY part of the data/evidence.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
References

1. Vermeent, S., Schubert, A.-L., DeJoseph, M. L., Denissen, J. J. A, van Gelder, J.-L. & Frankenhuis, W. E. (2024). Working memory performance in adverse environments: Enhanced, impaired, or intact? In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/dp7wc
Working memory performance in adverse environments: Enhanced, impaired, or intact?Stefan Vermeent, Anna-Lena Schubert, Meriah L. DeJoseph, Jaap J. A. Denissen, Jean-Louis van Gelder, Willem E. Frankenhuis<p>Decades of research have shown that adversity tends to lower working memory (WM) performance. This literature has mainly focused on impairments in the overall capacity to hold information available in WM for further processing. However, some re...Social sciencesYuki YamadaAnonymous, Kathryn Bates2023-10-30 15:11:48 View
21 Jun 2022
STAGE 1

Pathway between Negative Interpretation Biases and Psychological Symptoms: Rumination as a Transdiagnostic Mediator in a Longitudinal Study

Probing the interaction between interpretation bias and repetitive negative thinking in subclinical psychopathology

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Ariana Castro and Rita Pasion
Research in clinical psychology has found that interpretation bias (perceiving ambiguous information in a systematically negative or hostile way) and repetitive negative thinking (recurrent, prolonged worry or rumination) are associated with a range of psychopathologies – including depression, anxiety and paranoia – but the complex interplay between them in driving symptomatology is unclear. Here, Chung and Cheung (2022) propose a longitudinal examination of the directional relationship between interpretation bias and psychological symptoms in subclinical depression and paranoia, as well as the potential transdiagnostic mediating role of repetitive negative thinking. Using an online three-wave design, they ask whether the association between negative interpretation biases and psychological symptoms is bidirectional, whether negative interpretation biases are associated with repetitive negative thinking over time, and whether repetitive negative thinking is associated with psychological symptoms over time. They will also test whether negative interpretation biases and psychological symptoms exert reciprocal influences across dimensions through repetitive negative thinking, and whether repetitive negative thinking acts as a transdiagnostic mediator for depression and paranoid thoughts. Overall, the study aims to generate a clearer understanding of the relationship between interpretation biases and subclinical symptomatology, as well as clarifying the role of rumination as a transdiagnostic mechanism that mediates psychopathology.
 
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/89n7u (currently under 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. Chung, H.-F. & Cheung, S.-H. (2022). Repetitive negative thinking as a transdiagnostic mediator in the interplay of interpretation biases and psychological symptoms in depression and paranoia: A three-wave longitudinal study, in principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/89n7u
Pathway between Negative Interpretation Biases and Psychological Symptoms: Rumination as a Transdiagnostic Mediator in a Longitudinal StudyChung, Ho-Fung, Cheung, Sing-Hang, <h4>​Background</h4> <p>The association between interpretation biases and content-relevant symptoms have been well-established but no studies have investigated their cause-and-effect relationship in a prospective longitudinal design. To date, the...Social sciencesChris Chambers Ariana Castro, Rita Pasion2022-02-17 05:36:23 View
21 Nov 2022
STAGE 1

Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012)

Does denial of animal minds explain the "meat paradox"?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Brock Bastian, Ben De Groeve, Florian Lange and Sebastian Berger
The psychology of meat-eating offers a fascinating window into moral reasoning, cognition and emotion, as well as applications in the shift toward more sustainable and ethical alternatives to meat consumption. One key observation in this field is the so-called “meat paradox” – the tendency for people to simultaneously eat meat while also caring about animals. One way to resolve this conflict and reduce cognitive dissonance is for people to separate the concept of meat from animals, mentally disengaging from the origins of meat in order to make the act of consumption more ethically acceptable. Another potential explanation is a motivated “denial of mind”, in which people believe that animals lack the mental capacity to experience suffering; therefore, eating an animal is not a harm that the animal will experience. In support of the latter hypothesis, Bastian et al (2012) found that animals judged to have greater mental capacities were also judged to less edible, and that simply reminding meat eaters that an animal was being raised for the purposes of meat consumption led to denial of its mental capacities.
 
Using a large-scale online design in 1000 participants, Jacobs et al. (2022) propose a replication of two studies from Bastian et al. (2012): asking how the perceived mental capabilities of animals relates to both their perceived edibility and the degree of moral concern they elicit, and whether learning that an animal will be consumed influences perceptions of its mental capabilities. Among various exploratory analyses, the authors will also examine whether the perception of animal minds (in animals consumed for meat) varies systematically according to species.
 
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/cru4z
 
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. Bastian, B., Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., & Radke, H. R. M. (2012). Don’t mind meat? The denial of mind to animals used for human consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211424291
 
2. Jacobs, T. P., Wang, M., Leach, S., Loong, S. H., Khanna, M., Chan, K. W., Chau, H. T., Tam, Y. Y. & Feldman, G. (2022). Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012), in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/cru4z
Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012) Tyler P. Jacobs, Meiying Wang, Stefan Leach, Siu Ho Loong, Mahika Khanna, Ka Wan Chan, Ho Ting Chau, Yuen Yan Tam, Gilad Feldman<p>This is a scheduled PCI-RR snap shot for a planned project: "Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012) ​"</p>Social sciencesChris Chambers Ben De Groeve, Florian Lange, Brock Bastian, Sebastian Berger2022-03-04 04:21:18 View
17 Jan 2023
STAGE 1
article picture

Similarities and differences in a global sample of song and speech recordings

Exploring cross-cultural variation in speech and song

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Bob Slevc, Nai Ding and 1 anonymous reviewer
For centuries, the ubiquity of language and music across human societies has prompted scholars to speculate about their cross-cultural origins as well as their shared and unique characteristics. Depending on the extent to which contemporary theories emphasise the role of biology vs. culture, a range of hypotheses have been proposed concerning expected similarities and differences in song and speech. One class of hypotheses stemming from cultural relativism assumes a lack of universal regularities in song and speech, and therefore predicts no systematic cross-cultural relationships. On the other hand, more recent evolutionary hypotheses such as the social bonding hypothesis, motor constraint hypothesis, and sexual selection hypothesis all predict differences or similarities in specific characteristic of vocalisations, such as pitch regularity, pitch interval size, and melodic contour. Existing results are mixed in their support of these predictions.
 
In the current study, Ozaki et al. (2022) embark on an ambitious project to elucidate cross-cultural similarities and differences between speech and song in 81 different linguistic varieties spanning 23 language families. Understanding precisely how song and speech are related is methodologically challenging due to the multitude of confounds that can arise in comparing natural recordings. Here the authors overcome these difficulties with four types of carefully controlled recordings: singing, recitation of sung lyrics, spoken description of the song, and instrumental version of the sung melody. The authors will then examine six features that are amenable to reliable comparison, including pitch height, temporal rate, pitch stability, timbral brightness, pitch interval size, and pitch declination. With this data in hand, the authors will ask which acoustic features differ reliably between song and speech across cultures, with the expectation that song will exhibit higher pitch, slower rate and more stable pitch than speech. At the same time, the authors expect song and speech to be reliably similar in the characteristics of timbral brightness, pitch intervals and pitch contours. In addition to these confirmatory tests, the authors will explore variation across a range of additional stimulus characteristics and ancillary research questions.
 
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/jdhtz
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 2. At least some data/evidence that will be used to answer the research question has been accessed and partially observed by the authors, but the authors certify that they have not yet observed the key variables within the data that will be used to answer the research question AND they have taken additional steps to maximise bias control and rigour.

List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1. Ozaki, Y., Savage P. E. et al. (2022). Similarities and differences in a global sample of song and speech recordings, in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/jdhtz
Similarities and differences in a global sample of song and speech recordingsCorresponding authors: Yuto Ozaki and Patrick E. Savage (Keio University, Japan). Full list of 80 authors is in the manuscript<p>What, if any, similarities and differences between song and speech are consistent across cultures? Both song and speech are found in all known human societies and are argued to share evolutionary roots and cognitive resources, yet no studies ha...Social sciencesChris Chambers Bob Slevc, Nai Ding2022-09-16 16:03:10 View
31 May 2023
STAGE 1

Defacing biases in manual and automated quality assessments of structural MRI with MRIQC

The impact of removing facial features on quality measures of structural MRI scans

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Catherine Morgan and Cassandra Gould van Praag
Data sharing is perhaps the most fundamental step for increasing the transparency and reproducibility of scientific research. However, the goals of open science must be tempered by ethical considerations, protecting the privacy and safety of research participants. Bridging this gap causes challenges for many fields, such as human neuroimaging. Brain images, as measured with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are unique to the participant and therefore contain identifying information by definition. One way to mitigate the risk to participants arising from public data sharing has been "defacing" the MRI scans, i.e., literally removing the part of the image that contains the face and surrounding tissue, while preserving the brain structure. This procedure however also removes information that is not (or at least minimally) identifiable. It also remains unclear whether defacing the images affects image quality and thus the information necessary for addressing many research questions.
 
The current study by Provins et al. (2023) seeks to address this question. Leveraging a publicly available "IXI dataset" comprising hundreds of T1-weighted structural MRI scans, they will assess the effect of defacing on manual and automatic estimates of image quality. Specifically, the researchers will compare image quality ratings by experts for a subset of 185 images. They hypothesise that images in which facial features have been removed are typically assigned higher quality ratings. Moreover, using a full data set of 580 images, which have been obtained across three scanning sites, they will also test the impact defacing MRI scans has on automated quality measures obtained with MRIQC software. The results of this study should have important implications for open science policy and for designing the optimal procedures for sharing structural MRI data in an ethical way. For example, if the authors' hypothesis is confirmed, studies relying on MRI quality measures might be better served by a custodianship model where identifiable data is shared under strict conditions, rather than relying on publishing defaced data. More generally, the outcome of this study may have significant legal implications in many jurisdictions.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated at the inital triage stage by the Recommender and PCI:RR team, and another round of in-depth review by two experts. After a detailed response and substantial revisions, the recommender judged the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/qcket (under temporary private embargo)
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 2. At least some data/evidence that will be used to answer the research question has been accessed and partially observed by the authors, but the authors certify that they have not yet observed the key variables within the data that will be used to answer the research question AND they have taken additional steps to maximise bias control and rigour.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
References
 
1. Provins, C., Savary, E., Alemán-Gómez, Y., Richiardi, J., Poldrack, R. A., Hagmann, P. & Esteban, O. (2023). Defacing biases in manual and automated quality assessments of structural MRI with MRIQC, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/qcket
Defacing biases in manual and automated quality assessments of structural MRI with MRIQCCéline Provins, Yasser Alemán-Gómez, Jonas Richiardi, Russell A. Poldrack, Patric Hagmann, Oscar Esteban<p>A critical requirement before data-sharing of human neuroimaging is removing facial features to protect individuals’ privacy. However, not only does this process redact identifiable information about individuals, but it also removes non-identif...Medical SciencesD. Samuel Schwarzkopf Cassandra Gould van Praag, Catherine Morgan, Abiola Akinnubi 2022-11-28 10:59:32 View
25 Oct 2023
STAGE 1

Does pupillometry provide a valid measure of spatial attentional bias (pseudoneglect)?

Assessing visuospatial biases (pseudoneglect) using pupillometry: A replication and extension of Strauch et al. (2022)

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Christoph Strauch and Bianca Hatin
‘Pseudoneglect’ is a small, lateralised bias of visuospatial attention towards the left side of space, and is typically observed in healthy adults. Recently, Strauch et al. (2022) reported that bright stimuli presented in the left visual field induced a greater constriction of the pupil (the pupillary light reflex) compared to the same bright stimuli presented in the right visual field. Further, the pupillary restriction bias was positively correlated with a behavioural measure of pseudoneglect (the greyscales task). This is potentially an important development for attention research, because the passive nature of the task, in addition to the ability to track the time course of the bias measures, could provide a new, and highly sensitive, method of studying spatial attention.
 
In this report, Burns and McIntosh (2023) aim to replicate and extend the study of Strauch et al. (2022). The extension centres around investigating whether the pupillary biases are influenced by recording pupillary responses from the right or left eye. In their pilot replication data, Burns & McIntosh identified a larger constriction in response to stimuli on the right side when recording from the right eye. They hypothesise that pupillary biases may be stronger to stimuli presented in the ipsilateral, rather than contralateral, side of space.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was reviewed over 2 rounds by 2 reviewers, including the authors of the study being replicated. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers’ comments and edits to the Stage 1 report, 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/ua9jn

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. Strauch, C., Romein, C., Naber, M., Van der Stigchel, S. & Ten Brink, A. F. (2022). The orienting response drives pseudoneglect—Evidence from an objective pupillometric method. Cortex, 151, 259-271.
 
2. Burns, N. E. & McIntosh, R. D. (2023). Does pupillometry provide a valid measure of spatial attentional bias (pseudoneglect)? In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/ua9jn
Does pupillometry provide a valid measure of spatial attentional bias (pseudoneglect)?Nicola E. Burns, and Robert D. McIntosh<p>Strauch et al. (2022) introduced a novel approach to assess biases of visual attention, by measuring pupillary constriction in response to split-field stimuli, in which a bright patch is presented to one visual field and a dark patch to the oth...Social sciencesGemma Learmonth Christoph Strauch2023-07-12 18:27:28 View
09 Jun 2022
STAGE 1

Revisiting diversification bias and partition dependence: Replication and extensions of Fox, Ratner, and Lieb (2005) Studies 1, 2, and 5

Testing the replicability of diversification bias and partition dependence

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Craig Fox and Leo Cohen
When offered a range of options and asked to make multiple selections, how do people choose? Over the last 30 years, a key finding to emerge from behavioural economics is that people distribute their choices more evenly than would be considered optimal – a phenomenon termed “diversification bias” or the “diversification heuristic” (Read & Loewenstein, 1995). For example, when filling a plate from a buffet, you might be inclined to choose a relatively even amount of everything on offer, even when you prefer some foods over others. Similarly, when allocating savings among different investment options, people are prone to spreading their money more evenly than would maximise utility.
 
In an influential study, Fox et al. (2005) found that diversification bias can be shaped by so-called “partition dependence” – the tendency to allocate resources differently across options depending on how they are subjectively grouped. Such groupings could be arbitrary; so, for example, to return to the buffet example, people might diversify across high-level categories such as cooked and uncooked, savoury and sweet, or surf and turf, and then diversify across the options within those categories. The nature of level of these subjective (and potentially arbitrary) categorisations can strongly influence the final allocation of resources. Diversification bias and partition dependence have important implications for basic theory in judgment and decision-making as well as applications in behavioral economics and finance.
 
In the current study, Li and Feldman (2022) propose to replicate Studies 1, 2 and 5 from Fox et al. (2002) in a large online sample. In particular, they plan to ask how partitioning influences the allocation of choices between options, and the extent to which partition dependence is reduced in people with greater relevant expertise. The authors also propose extending the original study to explore individual differences in the desire for choice diversity as predictors of partition dependence.
 
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).
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/bx8vq
 
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. Read, D., & Loewenstein, G. (1995). Diversification bias: Explaining the discrepancy in variety seeking between combined and separated choices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 34-49. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.1.1.34
 
2. Fox, C. R., Ratner, R. K., & Lieb, D. S. (2005). How subjective grouping of options influences choice and allocation: Diversification bias and the phenomenon of partition dependence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 538-551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.538
  
3. Li, M. Y. & Feldman, G. (2022). Revisiting diversification bias and partition dependence: 
Replication and extension of Fox, Ratner, and Lieb (2005) Studies 1, 2, and 5, in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/bx8vq
Revisiting diversification bias and partition dependence: Replication and extensions of Fox, Ratner, and Lieb (2005) Studies 1, 2, and 5Mei Yee (Alice) Li, Gilad Feldman<p>This is a scheduled PCI-RR snap shot for a planned project: "Revisiting diversification bias and partition dependence: Replication and extensions of Fox, Ratner, and Lieb (2005) Studies 1, 2, and 5 ​"</p>Social sciencesChris Chambers Craig Fox, Leo Cohen2022-02-15 09:57:51 View