In 2024, a shirt worn by renowned baseball player Babe Ruth during the 1932 World Series sold for a record-breaking $24.1m, making it one of the most expensive collector’s items ever sold at auction. Ruth’s famous “called shot” jersey is just one of countless items previously owned by celebrities that routinely fetch eye-watering prices despite having no obvious use. Understanding what gives these objects their subjective value presents an intriguing challenge in economic and social psychology.

 

An influential study by Newman et al. (2011) proposed three explanations for such behaviour – first, that the object acts as a memento to remind the consumer of the celebrity; second, that the object is perceived to have a high market demand and is believed to attract a higher price on resale; and third that the object triggers a contagion effect – a phenomenon, observed in a variety of psychological contexts, in which the consumer believes that some intangible essence of the object’s previous owner might be transmitted to them through physical contact. Across a series of experiments, Newman et al. (2011) concluded that the evidence favours an explanation in terms of contagion.

 

Here, Chan et al. (2025) propose a large online study (N=1200; several times larger than the original study) to partially replicate Experiments 1 and 2 in Newman et al. (2011). The authors aim to establish the reliability of this supposed contagion effect and to test its potential dependence on proximity – that is, whether the desire to have physical contact with the person is necessary for the contagion effect to occur. Specifically, for their main questions they ask whether fame (celebrity, non-celebrity) and moral valence of the previous owner (positive, negative, mixed) influence item valuation, desire for physical contact, market demand, and willingness to purchase. To further test any dependence on proximity, the authors will ask whether fame and valence impact desire for non-physical contact.

 

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).

 

 

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. 

 

 

 

 

1. Newman, G. E., Diesendruck, G., & Bloom, P. (2011). Celebrity contagion and the value of objects. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1086/658999

 

2. Chan, M.,  Jin, Y., Chen, E. Y., Peng, S., Charlton, A. & Feldman, G. (2025). Revisiting celebrity contagion and the value of objects: Replication and extensions Registered Report of Newman et al. (2011). In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/gnrhf

High frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (hf-tRNS) is a relatively new form of non-invasive brain stimulation thought to enhance neural excitability and facilitate processing in targeted brain areas. The evidence for the efficacy of hf-tRNS is mixed, so a high-powered test of the proposed facilitatory effects is of high value to the field.

 

In the current study, Edwards et al. (2025) targeted the human middle temporal complex (hMT+), an area with a well-established critical role in global motion processing. The protocol was adapted from a study by Ghin et al. (2018) and focused on a sub-set of the original experimental conditions using a fully within-subjects design (n=42). Global motion processing was operationalised in terms of the coherence threshold for identification of the dominant direction of random-dot motion.

 

The experiment tested the predicted facilitation of contralateral motion processing (reduced coherence threshold) during hf-tRNS to the left hMT+. In particular, the specificity of this effect was tested by comparison to a sham stimulation control condition and an active stimulation control condition (left forehead). By targeting a brain area with a well-established critical role in behaviour, the authors aimed to evaluate the replicability and specificity of the facilitatory effects of hf-tRNS.

 

The results provided no evidence that hf-tRNS improves motion discrimination, with no significant facilitation of contralateral global motion processing following hf-tRNS to hM+, and no significant difference between hf-tRNS to hMT+ in comparison to either sham stimulation or forehead stimulation. These findings question the reliability and generalisability of tRNS as a neurocognitive intervention and call for a coordinated programme of high-powered research to establish the parameters under which such effects arise – ideally using the Registered Reports format to eliminate reporting bias.

 

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/bce7u
 
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:
 

 

1. Ghin, F., Pavan, A., Contillo, A., & Mather, G. (2018). The effects of high-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (hf-tRNS) on global motion processing: an equivalent noise approach. Brain Stimulation, 11, 1263–75.

 

2. Edwards, G., Ruhde, R., Carroll, M. B., & Baker, C. I. (2025). No facilitatory effects of transcranial random noise stimulation on motion processing: A registered report [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.03.18.643903v4.full.pdf

Psychology needs more replication. For the field to be a cumulative and robust science, we need to be able to verify that effects hold up in new samples. Particularly in the case of seminal findings that inspired long lines of follow-up research, it is of interest to assess if the original result is reliable.

 

In the current study, Leong and colleagues (2025) propose a high-powered direct replication of a seminal experiment by Rozin et al. (1997). In an online sample, the authors investigate attitudinal differences between moral vegetarians and health vegetarians, to study the consequences of moralization. The authors stay close to the original design, in order to allow for a clear conclusion on whether the findings of the original study has been successfully replicated or not. This study is part of a large collaborative effort to replicate seminal findings in in social psychology and decision-making.

 

This replication study has the potential to 1) increase our understanding of moralization, especially in the context of vegetarianism, and 2) allow for a systematic assessment of replicability in the social sciences.

 

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/6pyhf
 
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:

 

• Collabra: Psychology
• International Review of Social Psychology
• Meta-Psychology
• Peer Community Journal
• PeerJ
• Royal Society Open Science
• Social Psychological Bulletin
• Studia Psychologica
• Swiss Psychology Open

 

 

1. Leong, U., Chan, E. H. L., Yau, W. T., Ng, W. Y., Chim, T. W., Yeung, W., Tam, K. Y. Y., & Feldman, G. (2025). Revisiting the morality of vegetarianism and veganism: Replication Registered Report of Rozin et al. (1997). In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/6pyhf

 

2. Rozin, P., Markwith, M., & Stoess, C. (1997). Moralization and becoming a vegetarian: The transformation of preferences into values and the recruitment of disgust. Psychological Science, 8, 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00685.x

Amendola and colleagues (2025) examined the usefulness of Harmful Dysfunction Analysis (HDA) in identifying individuals with pathological social media disorder. Harmful Dysfunction Analysis, proposed by Wakefield et al (1992), is a framework for constructing diagnostic criteria, and suggests a disorder is a harmful dysfunction, and defines a dysfunction as a failure of an internal mechanism to perform its naturally designed function. One important distinction of HDA is that harmful consequences of behaviour in the absence of dysfunction does not mean a disorder is present. Both dysfunction and harm are required for diagnosis of a disorder
 
Their analysis is based on data from the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children study (specifically the Swiss sample, N = 7,510), which is a world health organisation collaborative cross-sectional study of adolescent well-being from 2018 (https://www.who.int/europe/initiatives/health-behaviour-in-school-aged-children-(hbsc)-study). They examined the 9-item Social Media Disorder Scale under DSM-5 and HDA categories (dysfunction and harm), and examine convergence between the scoring methods. 
 
Their findings suggested higher prevalence of problematic social media usage and gaming disorder prevalence (33.2 and 9%, respectively) using substance use disorder (DSM-5) compared to prevalence rates of 22.2% and 4.2% when using Harmful Dysfunction analyses. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similarly findings in a sample of individuals from Hungary. They suggest that their findings might help to eliminate false positive diagnoses for individuals who engage in high intensity social media / gaming usage, that might be mistaken for a mental disorder.  However, as discussed by the authors caution is warranted findings are limited to adolescents (aged 11-15) and based on self-reported variables. 

 

The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated by two expert reviewers across one round of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria and awarded a positive recommendation.

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/y3ub8
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 3. At least some data/evidence that was used to the answer the research question had been previously accessed by the authors (e.g. downloaded or otherwise received), but the authors certify that they had not observed any part of the data/evidence prior Stage 1 to in-principle acceptance.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 

 

References
 
1. Amendola, S., Hengartner, M. P., & Wakefield, J. C. (2025). TThe Harmful Dysfunction Analysis applied to the concept of behavioral addiction: A secondary analysis of data from the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children 2018 [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/atwgy_v3
 
2. Wakefield, J. C. (1992). Disorder as Harmful Dysfunction: A Conceptual Critique of DSM-III-R’s Definition of Mental Disorder. Psychological Review, 99, 232–247. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.99.2.232

 

One of the hallmarks of adaptive behaviour is perceptual decision-making: the ability to select and integrate sensory inputs to guide judgments and actions. For decades, evidence accumulation models (EAMs) have been influential in shaping understanding of perceptual decision-making, proposing that evidence for different choices builds over time until a threshold is reached and a decision is triggered. At the same time, reliable biomarkers for evidence accumulation have been observed through single-unit recordings in non-human primates, particularly in parietal, frontal and premotor regions. In humans, the centro-parietal positivity (CPP) –  a positive deflection in the event-related potential (ERP) waveform – has emerged as a candidate proxy of perceptual decision-making, exhibiting accumulate-to-bound dynamics, modality-independence, and versatility to sensory inputs. However, much remains to be understood about the generalisability of the CPP across different behavioural contexts, from simple decision-making tasks (e.g. motion discrimination) to more complex judgments (e.g. emotion discrimination).

 

In the current study, Liu et al. (2025) will test the robustness of the CPP in human decision-making by leveraging secondary analysis of existing datasets. Broadly, they hypothesise that if the CPP is a reliable and generalisable biomarker then it should covary statistically with evidence accumulation, both at the trial level and across tasks that increase in complexity. To test this prediction, the authors will undertake joint modelling of behavioural and ERP data using drift-diffusion modelling, capturing variability within and between trials to estimate the relationship between the CPP and drift rate. In addition, the authors will use multiverse analysis to test the robustness of the observed relationships across a range of different analysis choices, with decision nodes focusing on the choice of CPP metric (build-up rate, amplitude, or peak amplitude) and pooling method in statistical analysis (trial-wise or bin-wise). Overall, the study promises to offer a fresh perspective – both methodologically and theoretically – on how CPP relates to perceptual decision-making.

 

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/vwmzh
 
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:
 

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

 

 

Liu, Y., Yan, C., & Chuan-Peng, H. (2025). Is CPP an ERP marker of evidence accumulation in perceptual decision-making? A multiverse study. In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/vwmzh