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 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
17 Jun 2024
STAGE 1
Loneliness in the Brain: Distinguishing Between Hypersensitivity and HyperalertnessA new look at loneliness by testing hyperalternessRecommended by Hedwig Eisenbarth and D. Samuel Schwarzkopf based on reviews by Marta Andreatta and 1 anonymous reviewer
Do people who are more alert towards social stimuli vary in loneliness? This report addresses the question how loneliness relates to hypersensitivity to social stimuli using an oddball paradigm. Based on preliminary results, the study plans to compare high and low lonely individuals for how they react to happy and angry facial expressions using neurophysiological correlates. Findings from the study will provide further insights in how loneliness might be related to processing of social information.
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two 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/fxngv 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. Bathelt, J., Dijk, C., & Otten, M. (2024). Loneliness in the Brain: Distinguishing Between Hypersensitivity and Hyperalertness. In principle acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/fxngv | Loneliness in the Brain: Distinguishing Between Hypersensitivity and Hyperalertness | Joe Bathelt, Corine Dijk, Marte Otten | <p>Introduction: Loneliness has emerged as a pressing public health issue, necessitating greater understanding of its mechanisms to devise effective treatments. While the link between loneliness and biased social cognition is a commonly proposed, ... | Social sciences | Hedwig Eisenbarth | Marta Andreatta, Anonymous | 2023-11-20 16:34:04 | ||
Unveiling the Positivity Bias on Social Media: A Registered Experimental Study On Facebook, Instagram, And XSocial media positivity bias, or just positivity bias?Recommended by Veli-Matti Karhulahti 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 X | Alexandra 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 sciences | Veli-Matti Karhulahti | Marcel Martončik | 2024-09-23 11:20:07 | ||
11 Apr 2024
STAGE 1
Do pain and effort increase prosocial contributions?: Revisiting the Martyrdom Effect with a Replication and extensions Registered Report of Olivola and Shafir (2013)More pain, more prosocial? Assessing the Martyrdom EffectRecommended by Rima-Maria Rahal based on reviews by Vanessa Clemens and Liesbeth Mann
The Martyrdom Effect is a behavioral tendency in which individuals exhibit greater generosity when their acts of giving entail effort or self-sacrifice (Olivola & Shafir, 2013). Giving at a personal cost, in this mindset, is associated with ascribing and inferring more meaning and value to charitable giving or other forms of generosity than in instances where no particular pain or effort is required to enact prosocial behavior. Arguably, the Martyrdom Effect’s ability to boost prosocial behavior therefore departs from other theories of behavior change postulating that easy options to act prosocially could boost contributions (e.g., default effects in charitable giving, see Altmann et al., 2019; Goswami & Urminsky, 2016). Because they introduce complexity to the debate about encouraging prosocial behavior, three studies from Olivola and Shafir (2013) are now being addressed in this Registered Report by Cheng and Feldman (2024).
Combining these three studies in a high-powered within-subjects replication attempt, transparently communicating necessary deviations from the original design and carefully outlining the analysis strategy, the current study will offer insights into the robustness of prior findings on the role of effort and pain in determining donations. The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated by two reviewers and the recommender. 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/aq89u
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. Altmann, S., Falk, A., Heidhues, P., Jayaraman, R., & Teirlinck, M. (2019). Defaults and Donations: Evidence from a Field Experiment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 101, 808-826. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00774
2. Cheng, Y. T. & Feldman, G. (2024). Do pain and effort increase prosocial contributions?: Revisiting the Martyrdom Effect with a Replication and extensions Registered Report of Olivola and Shafir (2013). In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/aq89u
3. Goswami, I., & Urminsky, O. (2016). When should the Ask be a Nudge? The Effect of Default Amounts on Charitable Donations. Journal of Marketing Research, 53, 829-846. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0001
4. Olivola, C. Y., & Shafir, E. (2013). The Martyrdom Effect: When Pain and Effort Increase Prosocial Contributions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.767
| Do pain and effort increase prosocial contributions?: Revisiting the Martyrdom Effect with a Replication and extensions Registered Report of Olivola and Shafir (2013) | Yim Tung (Emanuel) Cheng, 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 | Rima-Maria Rahal | Liesbeth Mann, Vanessa Clemens | 2023-11-30 12:32:25 | ||
08 Nov 2024
STAGE 1
Relationship between perceived risk and compliance to infection control measures during the first year of a pandemicThe relationship between risk and compliance during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic in NorwayRecommended by Adrien Fillon based on reviews by Erik Løhre, Gaëlle Marinthe, Lewend Mayiwar and 1 anonymous reviewer
What relationship can be expected between the perception of risk and compliance with protective measures? The authors of the current study measured the perceived risk of COVID-19 and compliance with infection control in Norway during the first year of the pandemic. While the authors state that the perceived risk has a positive association with compliance, they also hypothesize that both measures at Tn will predict the other at Tn+1, indicating a dynamic and bi-directional relationship. Finding support (or not) for this hypothesis can be crucial for developing interventions that will encourage compliance with infection control measures. The analysis will be quantitative.
The authors already collected the data, and the risk of bias due to the accessibility of data was discussed extensively during the peer-reviewing process. In summary, the authors will set up an alpha at 0.01, perform a multiverse analysis and present all the results associated. They will analyse the model with various ways of handling outliers, and the analysis will be made by a colleague who did not have access to the data. The authors already provided a script to produce the multiverse analysis. The recommender and reviewers agreed that these procedures are sufficient to control for the level of bias due to the accessibility of data.
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over three rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to 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/epdn8
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, the data analyst excepted, 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 Bjørkheim, S., Hystad, S., & Sætrevik, B. (2024). Relationship between perceived risk and compliance to infection control measures during the first year of a pandemic. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/epdn8
| Relationship between perceived risk and compliance to infection control measures during the first year of a pandemic | Sebastian Bjørkheim, Sigurd Hystad, Bjørn Sætrevik | <p>The way people perceive health risks is often assumed to influence how they adopt precautionary measures. However, people’s assessment of a given phenomenon’s risk may vary over time, and the relationship between perceived risk and compliance w... | Social sciences | Adrien Fillon | Lewend Mayiwar | 2023-10-25 10:16:57 | ||
26 Jun 2024
STAGE 1
Do Scarcity-Related Cues Affect the Sustained Attentional Performance of the Poor and the Rich Differently?How does economic status moderate the effect of scarcity cues on attentional performance?Recommended by Matti Vuorre based on reviews by Ernst-Jan de Bruijn and Leon Hilbert
This Stage 1 registered report by Szecsi et al. (2024) seeks to clarify whether individuals' economic conditions moderate how scarcity cues affect their attentional performance. This idea has been previously explored: Here, the authors aim to clarify understanding of the how scarcity cues affect cognition by studying a large and diverse Hungarian sample with improved experimental methods.
Specifically, while it has been previously reported that financially less well-off individuals' are differentially affected by finance-related stimuli (e.g. Shah et al., 2018), Szecsi et al. (2024) argue that prior studies have used small samples with insufficient consideration of potentially important demographic variables. Therefore, the generalizability of prior studies might be lacking.
Second, Szecsi et al. (2024) aim to conduct a more realistic experiment by asking participants to free-associate in response to financial scarcity-related cues, whereas prior studies have often focused on simply querying for rating responses, which might not sufficiently engage the related cognitive mechanisms that could be most affected.
In the proposed study, then, the authors will rigorously test whether financially less well-off individuals have lower attentional performance while experiencing scarcity-related cues than individuals who are financially better off, and that attentional performance does not differ while experiencing non-scarcity related cues. Ultimately, Szecsi et al. propose to shed light on theories of scarcity-related cognition that posit overall decrements in attentional performance irrespective of individuals' financial status.
The Stage 1 manuscript was initially reviewed by two experts in the area, who both recommended several improvements to the study. The authors then thoroughly revised their write-up and protocol, and the two reviewers were satisfied with the substance of these revisions. Based on these evaluations, the recommender judged that the Stage 1 criteria were met and awarded in-principle acceptance. There were remaining editorial clarifications and suggestions which the authors can incorporate in their eventual Stage 2 report.
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/3zdyb
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. Shah, A. K., Zhao, J., Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2018). Money in the mental lives of the poor. Social Cognition, 36, 4-19. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2018.36.1.4
2. Szecsi, P., Bognar, M., & Szaszi, B., (2024). Do Scarcity-Related Cues Affect the Sustained Attentional Performance of the Poor and the Rich Differently? In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/3zdyb
| Do Scarcity-Related Cues Affect the Sustained Attentional Performance of the Poor and the Rich Differently? | Peter Szecsi, Miklos Bognar, Barnabas Szaszi | <p>Cues related to financial scarcity are commonly present in the daily environment shaping people’s mental lives. However, the results are mixed on whether such scarcity-related cues disproportionately deteriorate the cognitive performance of poo... | Social sciences | Matti Vuorre | Leon Hilbert, Ernst-Jan de Bruijn | 2024-01-18 14:29:03 | ||
09 Jun 2022
STAGE 1
Revisiting diversification bias and partition dependence: Replication and extensions of Fox, Ratner, and Lieb (2005) Studies 1, 2, and 5Testing the replicability of diversification bias and partition dependenceRecommended by Chris Chambers 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 5 | Mei 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 sciences | Chris Chambers | Leo Cohen, Craig Fox | 2022-02-15 09:57:51 | ||
28 Dec 2021
STAGE 1
Sight vs. sound in the judgment of music performance: Cross-cultural evidence from classical piano and Tsugaru shamisen competitionsUnderstanding the role of visual and auditory information in evaluating musical performanceRecommended by Yuki Yamada based on reviews by David Hughes and Kyoshiro Sasaki
In this Stage 1 Registered Report, Chiba and colleagues (2021) aim to investigate how people use information from visual and auditory modalities when evaluating musical performances. Previous studies, mainly using Western music, have reported a visual dominance, but this has not yet been clearly and consistently reported. Thus, the authors propose to evaluate both the reproducibility and generalizability of the previous findings by conducting a replication study using the methodology of the previous studies and by introducing a new experimental condition in which the Tsugaru-shamisen, a unique Japanese musical instrument, is also performed. This study could represent an important turning point in the research context of performance evaluation and would be of considerable value. This manuscript was peer-reviewed by two experts in scientific methodology and Japanese traditional music, respectively, and during the two-round peer-review process they made a number of important points, but eventually awarded the manuscript a highly positive response. I am therefore pleased to recommend that this Stage 1 Registered Report meets our Stage 1 criteria and is worthy of in-principle acceptance. I look forward to seeing the results and discussion reported in Stage 2, with the expectation that the experiment conducted by the authors will be in strict accordance with this protocol. *The following is a very minor comment, which I hope the authors will find helpful in the future. Of course, this is not related to hypothesis construction and does not require revision: The "Blind Audition" study cited in the introduction is very impactful, but has recently been called into question, so I am at least a little cautious when citing this study. This article may be useful. https://www.wsj.com/articles/blind-spots-in-the-blind-audition-study-11571599303 URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/ry2b6 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
| Sight vs. sound in the judgment of music performance: Cross-cultural evidence from classical piano and Tsugaru shamisen competitions | Gakuto Chiba, Yuto Ozaki, Shinya Fujii, Patrick E. Savage | <p style="text-align: justify;">Which information dominates in evaluating performance in music? Both experts and laypeople consistently report believing that sound should be the most important domain when judging music competitions, but experime... | | Social sciences | Yuki Yamada | Kyoshiro Sasaki | 2021-09-24 08:59:26 | |
16 Oct 2024
STAGE 1
How perceptual ability shapes memory: An investigation in healthy special populationsPutting the enhanced processing account of perception and memory to the testRecommended by Reshanne Reeder based on reviews by Ariel Kershner and Katherine Moore
The enhanced processing account suggests that domain-specific expertise enhances the processing of information in that domain, such as enhanced color perception in visual artists and grapheme-color synaesthetes. A previous study (Ovalle-Fresa et al., 2021) found support for this account in both synaesthetes and non-synaesthete color experts; however, to fully understand the domain specificity of enhanced processing, other domains of expertise should be investigated and compared against each other in a double dissociation.
In this Stage 1 manuscript, Sachdeva et al. (2024) will investigate whether an enhanced processing account can explain domain-specific expertise in groups of color experts (i.e., visual artists) / grapheme-color synaesthetes and spatial experts (i.e., architects) / sequence-space synaesthetes. The spatial domain was chosen to compare to color since color and spatial processing recruit two distinctive cortical visual pathways: the ventral and dorsal streams, respectively. If enhanced processing is domain specific, then color experts / grapheme-color synaesthetes should show selective perceptual and memory performance enhancements for color tasks but not spatial tasks; and vice versa for spatial experts and sequence-space synaesthetes. The authors of this planned study further propose that perceptual performance should predict memory performance in the domain of expertise only; and that synaesthetes and non-synaesthetes with the same domain of expertise should perform similarly to each other.
To address these hypotheses, four independent groups will be recruited: grapheme-color synaesthetes, visual artists, sequence-space synaesthetes, and architects. Individuals with overlapping expertise and synaesthesia (e.g., visual artists who also have grapheme-color synaesthesia) will be excluded. Perception, short-term memory, and long-term memory for color (3 tasks) and space (3 tasks) will be assessed in all groups, and the authors will compare groups (synaesthetes, non-synaesthetes), domains of expertise (color, space), and task feature (color, space) in 2x2x2 linear mixed models. For all models, the authors predict that a significant interaction between domain of expertise and task feature will provide evidence for the domain specificity of the enhanced processing account. Additional analyses concerning working memory load (one, three, or five items) in the short-term memory tasks, and testing day (one, two, or three days post-training) in the long-term memory tasks, will be conducted to more deeply explore potential performance enhancements related to domain-specific expertise. Although these analyses may potentially provide additional evidence in favor of the hypothesized direction of effects, any deviation from predicted may pose a challenge for the interpretation of results. Nevertheless, this planned study is methodologically rigorous, and comprehensive in its aims.
The Stage 1 submission was evaluated by the recommender and two expert reviewers. Following revisions, 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/6wn4m
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. Ovalle-Fresa, R., Ankner, S., & Rothen, N. (2021). Enhanced perception and memory: Insights from synesthesia and expertise. Cortex, 140, 14-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2021.01.024
2. Sachdeva, D. & Whelan, E., Ovalle-Fresa, R., Rey-Mermet, A., Ward, J., & Rothen, N.. (2024). How perceptual ability shapes memory: An investigation in healthy special populations. In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/6wn4m | How perceptual ability shapes memory: An investigation in healthy special populations | Chhavi Sachdeva, Emily Whelan, Rebecca Ovalle-Fresa, Alodie Rey-Mermet, Jamie Ward, Nicolas Rothen | <p>The enhanced processing account posits a close connection between visual perceptual ability and memory. This account finds support in studies involving special populations with conditions based on neural changes in the ventral visual pathway, s... | Life Sciences | Reshanne Reeder | Katherine Moore, Ariel Kershner | 2024-05-03 14:15:43 | ||
21 Feb 2022
STAGE 1
Recommended by Benoit Pujol based on reviews by Jean-François Gerard, Rachel Harrison and 1 anonymous reviewer
This submission has been withdrawn (see notice below)Sex-biased dispersal is widely acknowledged to influence range expansion and the geographic limits of species (Trochet et al. 2016). Evidence is accruing that suggests an impact of the learning ability of species on their capacity to colonise new habitats because the ability to learn provides an advantage when confronted to novel challenges (Lee and Thornton 2021). Whether these two mechanisms interact to shape range expansion remains however unknown. One could expect this interaction because both dispersal and the ability to learn are linked to related behaviours (e.g., exploration, Lee and Thornton 2021). In their study entitled “Investigating sex differences in learning in a range-expanding bird”, Alexis J. Breen and Dominik Deffner (Breen and Deffner 2022) propose to test this hypothesis in range-expanding great-tailed grackles (Quiscalus mexicanus) by exploring the individual variation of several behavioural traits (e.g., exploration, neophobia, problem solving, Logan 2016) linked to their learning ability. They will use a colour-reward reinforcement experimental approach to compare the learning performance between male and female great-tailed grackles in three study sites and evaluate whether sex-biased learning ability interacts with sex-biased dispersal. Data will be analysed by a Bayesian reinforcement learning model (Deffner et al. 2020), which was validated. This Stage 1 registered report was evaluated over one round of in-depth review by Jean-François Gerard, Rachel Harrison and one anonymous reviewer, and another round of review by Jean-François Gerard and Rachel Harrison. Based on detailed responses to the comments and the modifications brought to the manuscript by the authors, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and therefore awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA). Withdrawal notice: The Stage 2 manuscript associated with this accepted Stage 1 protocol was submitted to PCI RR on 22 July 2022. On 25 July 2022, the Managing Board offered the opportunity for the authors to revise the manuscript prior to in-depth review. On 7 Sep 2022, the authors withdrew the Stage 2 manuscript from consideration due to time constraints.URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/v3wxb
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 Trochet, A., Courtois, E. A., Stevens, V. M., Baguette, M., Chaine, A., Schmeller, D. S., Clobert, J., & Wiens, J. J. (2016). Evolution of sex-biased dispersal. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 91(3), 297–320. https://doi.org/10.1086/688097 Lee, V. E., & Thornton, A. (2021). Animal cognition in an urbanised world. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 9, 120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2021.633947 Logan, C. J. (2016b). Behavioral flexibility in an invasive bird is independent of other behaviors. PeerJ, 4, e2215. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2215 Deffner, D., Kleinow, V., & McElreath, R. (2020). Dynamic social learning in temporally and spatially variable environments. Royal Society Open Science, 7(12), 200734. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.200734 Breen, A. J. & Deffner D. (2022). Investigating sex differences in learning in a range-expanding bird., https://github.com/alexisbreen/Sex-differences-in-grackles-learning, in principle acceptance of version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/v3wxb | [WITHDRAWN]: Investigating sex differences in learning in a range-expanding bird | Alexis J. Breen & Dominik Deffner | <p style="text-align: justify;">How might differences in dispersal and learning interact in range expansion dynamics? To begin to answer this question, in this preregistration we detail the background, hypothesis plus associated predictions, and m... | | Life Sciences | Benoit Pujol | Kate Cross, Rachel Harrison, Jean-François Gerard | 2021-11-10 13:12:04 | |
20 Jun 2022
STAGE 1
Revisiting stigma attributions and reactions to stigma: Replication and extensions of Weiner et al. (1988)Understanding the psychology of stigmasRecommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Charlotte Pennington and Joanne Rathbone
Stigmas are prejudices or discrimination against people based on qualities that vary from the norm, such as a physical or mental illness, disability, sexuality, race, or one of many other personal characteristics. The harm caused by stigmatisation has made understanding the causes and potential solutions a vital area of study in psychology and public health. One of the major focuses of ongoing research is understanding the factors that determine whether a particular characteristic becomes stigmatised, and if so how the stigma might be eliminated. Previous research has found that for disease-based stigmas, the contagiousness, course, and disruptiveness of a disease can be influential. Another key determinant is the perceived cause of the stigmatised condition or characteristic. In a landmark study, Weiner et al. (1988) reported that attributes based on physical health were more likely to be perceived as being uncontrollable, stable and irreversible, prompting feelings of sympathy without anger or judgment. On the other hand, attributes related to mental health and behaviour were more likely to be regarded as controllable and reversible, prompting lack of sympathy coupled with feelings of anger and negative judgement. In a second experiment, they also found that manipulating the perception of controllability can modify emotional responses and judgments – for some stigmas (but not others), providing participants with information that a particular characteristic was controllable vs. uncontrollable was found to increase or decrease negative attributions, respectively.
In the current study, Yeung and Feldman (2022) propose to replicate Experiment 2 from Weiner et al. (1988) in a large online sample. In particular, they plan to ask how the source of a stigma is related to perceived controllability and stability, emotional reactions, and willingness to help. They also propose a range of extensions, including the inclusion of additional stigmas that have become relevant since the original study was published over 30 years ago.
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/k957f 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. Weiner, B., Perry, R. P., & Magnusson, J. (1988). An attributional analysis of reactions to stigmas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 738–748. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.5.738
2. Yeung, K. Y. & Feldman, G. (2022). Revisiting stigma attributions and reactions to stigma: Replication and extensions of Weiner et al. (1988), in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/k957f
| Revisiting stigma attributions and reactions to stigma: Replication and extensions of Weiner et al. (1988) | Kwan Yin (Gladys) Yeung, Gilad Feldman | <p>This is a scheduled PCI-RR snap shot for a planned project: "Revisiting stigma attributions and reactions to stigma: Replication and extensions of Weiner et al. (1988) "</p> | Social sciences | Chris Chambers | Joanne Rathbone | 2022-02-15 10:55:13 |
