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 * | Picture | Thematic fields * | Recommender | Reviewers | Submission date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15 Sep 2023
STAGE 1
Do error predictions of perceived exertion inform the level of running pleasure?Does running pleasure result from finding it easier than you thought you would?Recommended by Zoltan Dienes based on reviews by Jasmin Hutchinson and 1 anonymous reviewer
The reward value of a stimulus is based on an error in prediction: Things going better than predicted. Could this learning principle, often tested on short acting stimuli, also apply to a long lasting episode, like going for a run? Could how rewarding a run is be based on the run going better than predicted?
Understanding the conditions under which exercise is pleasurable could of course be relevant to tempting people to do more of it! Brevers et al. (2023) will ask people before a daily run to predict the amount of perceived exertion they will experience; then just after the run, to rate the retrospective amount of perceived exertion actually experienced. The difference between the two ratings is the prediction error.
Participants will also rate their remembered pleasure in running and the authors will investigate whether running pleasure depends on prediction error.
The study plan was refined across four rounds of review, with input from two external reviewers and the recommender, after which it was judged to satisfy the Stage 1 criteria for in-principle acceptance (IPA). URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/xh724
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. Brevers, D., Martinent, G., Oz, I. T., Desmedt, O. & de Geus, B. (2023). Do error predictions of perceived exertion inform the level of running pleasure? In principle acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/xh724 | Do error predictions of perceived exertion inform the level of running pleasure? | Damien Brevers, Guillaume Martinent, İrem Tuğçe Öz, Olivier Desmedt, Bas de Geus | <p>Humans have the ability to mentally project themselves into future events (prospective thinking) to promote the implementation of health-oriented behaviors, such as the planning of daily sessions of physical exercise. Nevertheless, it is curren... | Social sciences | Zoltan Dienes | 2023-04-21 17:40:50 | |||
15 Feb 2022
STAGE 1
Does alleviating poverty increase cognitive performance? Short- and long- term evidence from a randomized controlled trialUnderstanding the effect of unconditional cash transfers on cognitionRecommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Charlotte Pennington and Matúš Adamkovič
Over the last decade, a growing body of evidence has revealed potential benefits of unconditional cash transfers (UCTs) on a variety of outcomes, including self-reported happiness and life satisfaction (Haushofer & Shapiro, 2016), economic and financial well-being (Blattman et al., 2013; Baird et al., 2018) and educational attainment (Baird et al., 2016). Although the effects of UCTs do not always out-perform rigorous control conditions (Whillans & West, 2022), these findings prompt the question of whether the alleviation of poverty via UCTs can also influence cognitive processing and performance. In the current study, Szaszi et al. propose to analyse the results of a previous randomised trial of UCTs by Blattman et al. (2017) to test whether a $200 lump sum administered to a sample of young men in Liberia carries both short- and long-term benefits for a range of executive functions, including attention, response inhibition, and working memory capacity. 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/k56yv 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. Haushofer, J. & Shapiro, J. (2016). The short-term impact of unconditional cash transfers to the poor: Experimental evidence from Kenya. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 13, 1973–2042. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw025
2. Blattman, C., Fiala, N. & Martinez, S. (2013) Generating skilled self-employment in developing countries: Experimental evidence from Uganda. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129, 697–752. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjt057
3. Baird, S., McKenzie, D., & Özler, B. (2018). The effects of cash transfers on adult labor market outcomes. IZA Journal of Development and Migration, 8, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40176-018-0131-9
4. Baird, S., Chirwa, E., De Hoop, J., & Özler, B. (2016). Girl power: cash transfers and adolescent welfare: evidence from a cluster-randomized experiment in Malawi. In African Successes, Volume II: Human Capital (pp. 139-164). University of Chicago Press. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c13380/c13380.pdf
5. Whillans, A., & West, C. (2022). Alleviating time poverty among the working poor: A pre-registered longitudinal field experiment. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04352-y
6. Szaszi, B., Palfi, B., Neszveda, G., Taka, A., Szecsi, P., Blattman, C., Jamison, J. C., & Sheridan, M. (2022). Does alleviating poverty increase cognitive performance? Short- and long- term evidence from a randomized controlled trial, in principle acceptance of version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/k56yv
7. Blattman, C., Jamison, J. C. & Sheridan, M. (2017). Reducing crime and violence: Experimental evidence from cognitive behavioral therapy in Liberia. American Economic Review, 107, 1165–1206. http://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20150503
| Does alleviating poverty increase cognitive performance? Short- and long- term evidence from a randomized controlled trial | Barnabas Szaszi, Bence Palfi, Gabor Neszveda, Aikaterini Taka, Peter Szecsi, Christopher Blattman, Julian C. Jamison, Margaret Sheridan | <p>Recent findings suggest that poverty has a deteriorating effect on cognitive functioning which can reinforce existing social inequalities. In this Registered Report, we will investigate the impact of a poverty alleviation program on cognitive p... | Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2021-07-22 20:34:50 | |||
Does alleviating poverty increase cognitive performance? Short- and long-term evidence from a randomized controlled trialNo strong effect of unconditional cash transfers on cognitionRecommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Charlotte Pennington and Matúš Adamkovič
Recent studies have revealed potential benefits of unconditional cash transfers (UCTs) on a variety of health and social outcomes, including self-reported happiness and life satisfaction (Haushofer & Shapiro, 2016), economic and financial well-being (Blattman et al., 2013; Baird et al., 2018) and educational attainment (Baird et al., 2016). Although the effects of UCTs do not always out-perform rigorous control conditions (Whillans & West, 2022), these findings prompt the question of whether the alleviation of poverty via UCTs can also influence cognitive processing and performance.
In the current study, Szaszi et al. analysed the results of a previous randomised trial of UCTs by Blattman et al. (2017) to test whether a $200 lump sum – equivalent to three months of income – administered to a sample of young men in Liberia carries both short- and long-term benefits for a range of executive functions, including attention, response inhibition, and working memory capacity. Overall, the results suggest minimal if any consequences of the intervention – the observed effects of UCTs on cognition were several times smaller than suggested by previous research, and the evidence for a positive effect was inconclusive. Extensive multiverse analyses showed that these findings were robust to a range of alternative analytical specifications, and the authors estimate that a sample size of nearly 5000 would be required to provide strong evidence.
In their Discussion, the authors explore a range of reasons for the negative findings compared with previous research, including the more rigorous and severe causal test enabled by the randomised trial design, the demographic homogeneity of the sample demographic, the use of pen-and-paper tests (cf. computerised tests in previous studies), and the delivery of a lump-sum cash transfer compared with a regular monthly installment. In addition, although the results were negative or inconclusive, there were hints that a positive effect of UCTs may be more evident in some cognitive domains than in others – in this case, potentially benefiting working memory more than inhibitory control. Further research would be required to confirm this hypothesis.
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over one round of in-depth review. Based on the 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/k56yv
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 acceptance, but the authors certified that they had not yet observed the key variables within the data that would be 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. Haushofer, J. & Shapiro, J. (2016). The short-term impact of unconditional cash transfers to the poor: Experimental evidence from Kenya. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 13, 1973–2042. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw025
2. Blattman, C., Fiala, N. & Martinez, S. (2013) Generating skilled self-employment in developing countries: Experimental evidence from Uganda. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129, 697–752. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjt057
3. Baird, S., McKenzie, D., & Özler, B. (2018). The effects of cash transfers on adult labor market outcomes. IZA Journal of Development and Migration, 8, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40176-018-0131-9
4. Baird, S., Chirwa, E., De Hoop, J., & Özler, B. (2016). Girl power: cash transfers and adolescent welfare: evidence from a cluster-randomized experiment in Malawi. In African Successes, Volume II: Human Capital (pp. 139-164). University of Chicago Press. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c13380/c13380.pdf
5. Whillans, A., & West, C. (2022). Alleviating time poverty among the working poor: A pre-registered longitudinal field experiment. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04352-y
6. Blattman, C., Jamison, J. C. & Sheridan, M. (2017). Reducing crime and violence: Experimental evidence from cognitive behavioral therapy in Liberia. American Economic Review, 107, 1165–1206. http://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20150503
7. Szaszi, B., Palfi, B., Neszveda, G., Taka, A., Szecsi, P., Blattman, C., Jamison, J. C., & Sheridan, M. (2022). Does alleviating poverty increase cognitive performance? Short- and long-term evidence from a randomized controlled trial. Stage 2 Registered Report, acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://psyarxiv.com/4gyzh
| Does alleviating poverty increase cognitive performance? Short- and long-term evidence from a randomized controlled trial | Barnabas Szaszi, Bence Palfi, Gabor Neszveda, Aikaterini Taka, Péter Szécsi, Christopher Blattman, Julian C. Jamison, Margaret Sheridan | <p>In this Registered Report, we investigated the impact of a poverty alleviation program on cognitive performance. We analyzed data from a randomized controlled trial conducted on low-income, high-risk individuals in Liberia where a random half o... | Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2022-07-13 12:10:49 | |||
23 May 2023
STAGE 1
Does Brooding Meaningfully Increase the Likelihood of Believing in a Conspiracy? A Registered ReportDoes brooding increase conspiracy beliefs?Recommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Matt Williams and 1 anonymous reviewer
The world is seemingly awash with conspiracy theories – from well-trodden examples such as fake Moon landings, the 9/11 truth movement, and Holocaust denial, to relative newcomers including COVID as a bioweapon, QAnon, and the belief that the science of climate change has been invented or falsified. While there is a public perception that conspiracy theories are becoming more prevalent, recent evidence suggests that the rate of conspiracism is relatively stable over time (Uscinski et al., 2022). At any point in history, it seems that a certain proportion of people find themselves vulnerable to conspiracy beliefs, but what distinguishes those who do from those who don’t, and what are the causal factors?
In the current study, Liekefett et al. (2023) investigate the critical role of rumination – a perseverative and repetitive focus on negative content leading to emotional distress. In particular, the authors ask whether one component of rumination referred to as brooding (dwelling on one’s worries and distressing emotions) has a specific causal role in the formation of conspiracy beliefs. In a series of preliminary experiments, the authors first established a procedure for successfully inducing rumination, identifying various boundary conditions and requirements for a successful design. In the proposed study (of up to N=1,638), they will then ask whether the induction of brooding causes a significant increase in conspiracy beliefs. Manipulation checks will be included to confirm intervention fidelity (independently of this hypothesis), and exploratory analyses will test the effect of various moderators, as well as the causal role of a complementary manipulation of reflection – a component of rumination in which attention is focused on the issue at hand rather than one’s emotions.
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/y82bs
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. Uscinski, J., Enders, A., Klofstad, C., Seelig, M., Drochon, H., Premaratne, K. & Murthi, M. (2022) Have beliefs in conspiracy theories increased over time? PLOS ONE 17: e0270429. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270429
2. Liekefett, L. Sebben, S. & Becker, J. C. (2023). Does Brooding Meaningfully Increase the Likelihood of Believing in a Conspiracy? Stage 1 Registered Report, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/y82bs | Does Brooding Meaningfully Increase the Likelihood of Believing in a Conspiracy? A Registered Report | Luisa Liekefett, Simone Sebben, Julia C. Becker | <p>This project aims to investigate the relationship between rumination and conspiracy beliefs. It<br>involves four pilot studies, including one observational and three experimental studies, but the<br>results were inconclusive. We suggest that ru... | Humanities, Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2023-02-01 14:47:09 | |||
24 Oct 2022
STAGE 1
Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgeryIs childhood adversity associated with a heightened response to opioids?Recommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Zoltan Dienes, Yuki Yamada and 1 anonymous reviewer
A convergence of evidence suggests that early life adversity may cause dysfunction in opioid-sensitive reward systems. Childhood adversity is associated with opioid use, potentially by altering reward and motivation networks, and experimental models in animals have found that early life adversity increases and consolidates opioid seeking behaviours. Further, in a recent controlled experiment, Carlyle et al. (2021) found that opioid administration produced stronger positive responses, and weaker negative responses, in adults with a history of childhood abuse and neglect.
In the current study, Carlyle et al. seek to test the generalisability of these previous findings in a pre-operative clinical setting. Using partially observed data from an existing cohort study (N=155), the authors will test whether patients with greater experience of childhood trauma in turn exhibit a larger mood boost and express greater subjective pleasure following opioid administration. Although not a randomised experimental design, this study provides the opportunity to examine the relationship between opioid response and history of childhood adversity in a naturalistic setting, and thus has the potential to either support or cast doubt on the theory that adversity elevates risk of opioid addiction by altering sensitivity to subjectively pleasurable effects.
Following three rounds of in-depth review, 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/7ymts 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. Carlyle M., Broomby R., Simpson G., Hannon R., Fawaz L., Mollaahmetoglu O.M., Drain, J., Mostazir, M., & Morgan C. (2021). A randomised, double‐blind study investigating the relationship between early childhood trauma and the rewarding effects of morphine. Addiction Biology, 26(6):e13047.
2. Carlyle, M., Kvande, M., Leknes, S., Meier, I., Buen, K., Jensen, E. N., Ernst, G. & Eikemo, M. (2022). Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgery, in principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/7ymts
| Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgery | Molly Carlyle*, Malin Kvande*, Siri Leknes, Isabell Meier, Kaja Buen, Eira Nordeng Jensen, Gernot Ernst, Marie Eikemo. *denotes equal contribution. | <p>PCI-RR Snapshot only</p> | Life Sciences, Medical Sciences, Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2022-03-15 10:07:29 | |||
Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgeryIs childhood adversity associated with a heightened response to opioids?Recommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Zoltan Dienes, Yuki Yamada and 1 anonymous reviewer
A convergence of evidence suggests that early life adversity may cause dysfunction in opioid-sensitive reward systems. Childhood adversity is associated with opioid use, potentially by altering reward and motivation networks, and experimental models in animals have found that early life adversity increases and consolidates opioid seeking behaviours. Further, in a recent controlled experiment, Carlyle et al. (2021) found that opioid administration produced stronger positive responses, and weaker negative responses, in adults with a history of childhood abuse and neglect.
In the current study, Carlyle et al. (2023) tested the generalisability of these previous findings in a pre-operative clinical setting. Using partially observed data from an existing cohort study (N=155), the authors asked whether patients with greater experience of childhood trauma in turn exhibit a larger mood boost and express greater subjective pleasure following opioid administration.
In contrast to previous findings, the results did not support the hypotheses that more experiences of childhood adversity would heighten ratings of drug liking and feeling good following opioid administration. Regression analyses instead revealed a statistically significant negative association between childhood adversity and post-opioid liking and no significant relationship with feeling good. The authors suggest that the discrepancy between the current and previous results may be due to stress related to the pre-surgical setting, the brief duration of drug exposure, and the relatively limited levels of high childhood adversity in the study sample. Nevertheless, these findings cast some doubt on the theory that adversity elevates risk of opioid addiction by altering sensitivity to subjectively pleasurable effects.
Following one round of in-depth review, 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/7ymts 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 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. Carlyle M., Broomby R., Simpson G., Hannon R., Fawaz L., Mollaahmetoglu O.M., Drain, J., Mostazir, M., & Morgan C. (2021). A randomised, double‐blind study investigating the relationship between early childhood trauma and the rewarding effects of morphine. Addiction Biology, 26(6):e13047. https://doi.org/10.1111/adb.13047
2. Carlyle, M., Kvande, M., Meier, I. M., Trøstheim, M., Buen, K., Jensen, E. N., Ernst, G. & Leknes, S. & Eikemo, M. (2023). Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgery, acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/9kt3a?view_only=4238d2ee3d654c4f908a94efea82a027
| Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgery | Molly Carlyle1*, Malin Kvande*, Isabell M. Meier, Martin Trøstheim, Kaja Buen, Eira Nordeng Jensen, Gernot Ernst, Siri Leknes, Marie Eikemo (*denotes equal contribution) | <p><strong>Introduction</strong>: Opioid analgesic treatment during surgery entails risk of persistent use. Experiences of childhood adversity have been shown to increase opioid reward in preclinical models, a finding recently extended to healthy ... | Medical Sciences, Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2023-02-02 08:29:18 | |||
09 Sep 2024
STAGE 1
Does concern regarding climate change impact subsequent mental health? A longitudinal analysis using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC)Does concern regarding climate change impact subsequent mental health?Recommended by Thomas Evans based on reviews by Anna Castiglione and Esther Papies
The link between climate change and health is becoming increasingly clear, and problematic (IPCC, 2023). While most agree that climate change is a problem (Vlasceanu et al., 2024) and evidence is starting to emerge that individual's wellbeing can benefit from engaging in proenvironmental behaviour (Prinzing, 2023), there is little robust longitudinal evidence available to make causal claims about the complex and inter-related nature of these types of effects.
In their proposed study, Major-Smith et al. (2024) use the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children to explore whether climate concern has a causal impact upon mental health. Strategic use of this pre-existing data allows consideration of both confounding bias and reverse causality to provide more rigorous evidence for this causal effect. The second research question (whether climate action moderates this relationship) is of both personal and professional interest, as someone who struggles with climate anxiety, and plants hundred of trees annually to try and mitigate the dread. Capable of exploring the potential for individual-level climate action to have a double effect - directly help with climate change mitigation and also an individuals' mental health, the proposed research is a rewarding and insightful line of inquiry in a domain desperate for a more rapid and rigorous evidence-base.
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over one round of 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/t6d3k
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. IPCC (2023). Accessed here: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/resources/spm-headline-statements
2. Major-Smith, D., Halstead, I., & Major-Smith, K. (2024) Does concern regarding climate change impact subsequent mental health? A longitudinal analysis using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/t6d3k
3. Prinzing, M. (2023). Proenvironmental Behavior Increases Subjective Well-Being: Evidence From an Experience-Sampling Study and a Randomized Experiment. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241251766
4. Vlasceanu, M., Doell, K. C., Bak-Coleman, J. B., Todorova, B., Berkebile-Weinberg, M. M., Grayson, S. J., ... & Lutz, A. E. (2024). Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries. Science Advances, 10, eadj5778. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adj5778
| Does concern regarding climate change impact subsequent mental health? A longitudinal analysis using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) | Daniel Major-Smith, Isaac Halstead, Katie Major-Smith | <p>Climate change is having a substantial – and increasingly severe – impact on our planet, affecting people’s health, security and livelihoods. As a consequence, the concept of ‘climate anxiety’ has recently been developed to characterise the psy... | Medical Sciences, Social sciences | Thomas Evans | 2024-05-24 15:50:50 | |||
30 May 2024
STAGE 1
Does learning more about others impact liking them?: Replication and extension Registered Report of Norton et al. (2007)’s Lure of AmbiguityDoes familiarity really breed contempt?Recommended by Yuki Yamada based on reviews by Philipp Schoenegger and Zoltan Kekecs
In interpersonal evaluation, the amount of information available about the other person has a significant impact. Norton et al. (2007) conducted systematic experiments suggesting a 'less is more' effect – that a lack of information leads to a more positive evaluation. However, subsequent studies have not always reached the same conclusion.
In the current study, Horsham et al. (2024) aim to address this issue by conducting direct and conceptual replications of the Norton et al. (2007) experiments, as well as additional extensive experiments focusing on the effects of curiosity. The authors seek to confirm in a reliable way the relationship between ambiguity and liking, and even to clarify the factors that mediate this relationship. The results should significantly advance our understanding of the importance of information management in interpersonal relationships.
The Stage 1 manuscript was peer-reviewed by two experts; after four rounds of review and based on their revisions and detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and awarded it in-principle acceptance (IPA).
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/7mc4y
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. Norton, M. I., Frost, J. H., & Ariely, D. (2007). Less is more: The lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 97-105. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.97
2. Horsham, Z., Haydock-Symonds, A., Imada, H., Tai, H. C., Lau, W. L., Shum, T. L., Zeng, Y., Chow, H. T., & Feldman, G., (2024). Does learning more about others impact liking them? Replication and extension Registered Report of Norton et al. (2007)’s Lure of Ambiguity. In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/7mc4y
| Does learning more about others impact liking them?: Replication and extension Registered Report of Norton et al. (2007)’s Lure of Ambiguity | Zöe Horsham, Ashleigh Haydock-Symonds, Hirotaka Imada, Hiu Ching Tai, Wing Lam Lau, Tsz Lui Shum, Yuqing Zeng, Hiu Tang Chow, Gilad Feldman | <p>[IMPORTANT: Abstract, method, and results were written using a randomized dataset produced by Qualtrics to simulate what these sections will look like after data collection. These will be updated following the data collection. For the purpose o... | Social sciences | Yuki Yamada | Zoltan Kekecs | 2023-07-11 12:33:00 | ||
Does learning more about others impact liking them?: Replication and extension Registered Report of Norton et al. (2007)’s Lure of AmbiguityRevisiting ‘less is more’: A failure to replicate the association between increased knowing and decreased likingRecommended by Yuki Yamada based on reviews by Philipp Schoenegger and Zoltan Kekecs
Does knowing more about others necessarily lead to greater liking, or might it breed contempt, as suggested by Norton et al. (2007)? In the current study, Horsham et al. (2025) tried to replicate and extend that original question. Collecting data from a large sample of U.S. undergraduates and employing carefully revised designs reviewed at Stage 1, they replicated Norton et al.’s initial studies (1a, 1b, and 2) while also adding new measures. Their primary aim was to see if the “less is more” effect, where increased familiarity decreases liking, would hold under rigorous modern standards, including pre-registration and several open science practices.
Results indicated that people indeed believe they will like someone more if they know more about that person, replicating Norton et al.’s initial finding from Studies 1a and 1b. However, the association between greater knowledge and reduced liking, the core of the “less is more” claim, was not consistently observed. Instead, the data showed little evidence that accumulating information inevitably decreases liking. Moreover, an added examination of curiosity as a potential mediator revealed that although curiosity and liking are positively related, curiosity itself was not strongly contingent on the amount of knowledge participants had. These findings help clarify why previous literature has sometimes presented mixed outcomes, and they underline the distinction between what people predict will happen and what actually does happen in forming impressions of others.
Peer review involved thorough evaluations by experts. Following multiple revisions through Stages 1 and 2, the manuscript has been deemed a carefully executed Registered Report, providing transparent methods, open data, and full reproducibility. It adds nuance to discussions around how knowledge, familiarity, and curiosity jointly shape our interpersonal attitudes. On this basis, 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/7mc4y
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. Norton, M. I., Frost, J. H., & Ariely, D. (2007). Less is more: The lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 97-105. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.97
2. Horsham, Z., Haydock-Symonds, A., Imada, H., Tai, H. C., Lau, W. L., Shum, T. L., Zeng, Y., Chow, K., & Feldman, G. (2025). Does learning more about others impact liking them?: Replication and extension Registered Report of Norton et al. (2007)’s Lure of Ambiguity [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 6 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/ygkft
| Does learning more about others impact liking them?: Replication and extension Registered Report of Norton et al. (2007)’s Lure of Ambiguity | Zöe Horsham, Ashleigh Haydock-Symonds, Hirotaka Imada, Hiu Ching Tai, Wing Lam Lau, Tsz Lui Shum, Yuqing Zeng, Hiu Tang Chow, Gilad Feldman | <p>Norton et al. (2007) demonstrated a counterintuitive phenomenon that knowing other people better and/or having more information about them is associated with decreased liking. They summarized it as - ambiguity leads to liking, whereas familiari... | Social sciences | Yuki Yamada | Philipp Schoenegger, Zoltan Kekecs | 2024-11-22 04:27:45 | ||
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 Gemma Learmonth 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 sciences | Gemma Learmonth | Christoph Strauch | 2023-07-12 18:27:28 |
