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 fieldsRecommenderReviewersSubmission date
05 Jun 2024
STAGE 1

Revisiting Partition Priming in judgment under uncertainty: Replication and extension Registered Report of Fox and Rottenstreich (2003)

Understanding probability assessments with partitioned framing

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Olivier L'Haridon and Don Moore
Decision-making based on limited information is a common occurrence. Whether it is the possibility of a cheaper product elsewhere or the unknown qualifications of election candidates, people are regularly forced to make a decision under ignorance or uncertainty. In such situations, information about certain events is unavailable or too costly to acquire and people rely on subjective probability allocation to guide decision-making processes. This allocation seems to result in what is known as ignorance priors, i.e., decision-makers assigning equal probabilities to each possible outcome within a given set. How events are grouped or partitioned is often subjective and may influence probability judgments and subsequent decisions. In such cases, the way the choices within a choice set are presented may shape the perceived likelihood of different outcomes. Understanding the impact of partitioning on probability estimation is crucial for both psychological and economic theories of judgment and decision.
 
The question of evaluating probabilities under uncertainty has received much attention in the psychology and economics literature over the past decades given the wide range of possible applications. In the current work, Ding and Feldman (2024) seek to replicate one of the foundational works on the topic: Fox and Rottenstreich (2003). In the original work, the authors provided exploratory evidence indicating that the framing of a situation affects the way individuals perceive probabilities of possible outcomes. They showed that people assigned uniform probabilities to sets of events described in a problem, such that the way the events are described partly determines people’s partitioning of those events and evaluations of the probabilities of the possible outcomes. Additionally, this partitioned framing affected judgments both under conditions of ignorance (where individuals have no information and rely solely on uniform probability assignments) and uncertainty (where individuals have some information but still rely on heuristics influenced by partitioning). This suggests that priors resulting from the inference of available evidence are sometimes partly contaminated by partitioning bias, affecting both uninformed and partially informed decision-making processes. As a consequence, the partitioning of events into different subsets might lead to varying evaluations of a single situation, resulting in inconsistencies and poorly calibrated probability assessments.
 
Ding and Feldman (2024) aim to replicate Studies 1a, 1b, 3, and 4 from Fox and Rottenstreich (2003). Their close replication will rely on original data (US participants, Prolific, N=600, not collected yet) with a large statistical power (>95%). Their replication aims to examine whether the partitioned framing affects prior formation under ignorance (Studies 1a, 1b, and 4) and uncertainty (Study 3). In addition, the authors propose an extension examining estimations of alternative event(s) contrasting estimations of the probabilities of events happening versus of events not happening.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated by two external reviewers and the recommender. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' and the recommender’s comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and therefore awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/px6vb
 
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. Ding, K. & Feldman, G. (2024). Revisiting Partition Priming in judgment under uncertainty:
Replication and extension Registered Report of Fox and Rottenstreich (2003). In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/px6vb
 
2. Fox, C. R. & Rottenstreich, Y. (2003). Partition priming in judgment under uncertainty. Psychological Science, 14, 195-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.02431
Revisiting Partition Priming in judgment under uncertainty: Replication and extension Registered Report of Fox and Rottenstreich (2003)Kerou Ding, 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 sciencesRomain Espinosa2024-01-18 12:46:26 View
05 Jun 2024
STAGE 1
article picture

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

How stimulation intensity affects motor learning

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Charlotte Wiltshire and 1 anonymous reviewer
In neurostimulation research, the parameters of a stimulation protocol crucially impact on the effects of the stimulation. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neurostimulation technique that typically uses current intensities about 1-2 mA in human research to modulate motor and cognitive behavior. The current sham-controlled study by Hsu et al. (2024) applies current intensities not only of 2 mA but also of 4 mA and 6 mA and thus extends our understanding of stimulation parameters while ethical standards are preserved.
 
The influence of tDCS over the primary motor cortex will be evaluated for neural plasticity during motor learning. Stimulation effects will be tested not only behaviorally but also physiologically by motor evoked potentials elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). The presented pilot data are promising and underline the feasibility of the proposed research design. The study will contribute to tDCS research by uncovering reasons for controversial findings and thus increase reproducibility.
 
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/jyuev
 
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.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
Hsu, G., Edwards, D. J., Cohen, L. G., & Parra, L. C. (2024). Dose-response of tDCS effects on motor learning and cortical excitability: a preregistered study. In principle acceptance of Version 1.3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/jyuev
Dose-response of tDCS effects on motor learning and cortical excitability: a preregistered studyGavin Hsu, Dylan J. Edwards, Leonardo G. Cohen, Lucas C. Parra<p>Neuromodulatory effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the primary motor cortex (M1) have been reported in terms of changes in corticospinal excitability using motor evoked potentials (MEPs), as well as behavioral effects ...Engineering, Life SciencesChristina Artemenko2024-01-11 00:11:23 View
04 Jun 2024
STAGE 1
article picture

Voice preferences across contrasting singing and speaking styles

Exploring the enjoyment of voices

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Patrick Savage, Christina Vanden Bosch der Nederlanden, Christina Krumpholz and 1 anonymous reviewer
Beyond the semantics communicated by speech, human vocalisations can convey a wealth of non-verbal information, including the speaker’s identity, body size, shape, health, age, intentions, emotional state, and personality characteristics. While much has been studied about the neurocognitive basis of voice processing and perception, the richness of vocalisations leaves open fundamental questions about the aesthetics of (and across) song and speech, including which factors determine our preference (liking) for different vocal styles.
 
In the current study, Bruder et al. (2024) examine the characteristics that determine the enjoyment of voices in different contexts and the extent to which these preferences are shared across different types of vocalisation. Sixty participants will report their degree of liking across a validated stimulus set of naturalistic and controlled vocal performances by female singers performing different melody excerpts as a lullaby, as a pop song and as opera aria, as well as reading the corresponding lyrics aloud as if speaking to an adult audience or to an infant. The authors will then ask two main questions: first if there is a difference in the amount of shared taste (interrater agreement) across contrasting vocal styles, and second, as suggested by sexual selection accounts of voice attractiveness, whether the same performers are preferred across styles.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over three 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/7dvme
 
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. Bruder, C., Frieler, K. & Larrouy-Maestri, P. (2024). Voice preferences across contrasting singing and speaking styles. In principle acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/7dvme
Voice preferences across contrasting singing and speaking stylesCamila Bruder, Klaus Frieler & Pauline Larrouy-Maestri<p>Voice preferences are an integral part of interpersonal interactions and shape how people 1 connect with each other. While a large number of studies has investigated the mechanisms behind 2 (spoken) voice attractiveness, very little research wa...Social sciencesChris Chambers2022-11-30 23:02:34 View
02 Jun 2024
STAGE 1

Mapping Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Responsible Conduct of Research: A Delphi Study

Capturing Perspectives on Responsible Research Practice: A Delphi Study

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO and based on reviews by Moin Syed, Veli-Matti Karhulahti, Thomas Evans, Priya Silverstein and Sean Grant
​​The responsible conduct of research (RCR) is crucial for the health of the research ecosystem: high quality research should lead to more credible findings and increase public trust. However, the dimensions and responsibilities that make up RCR differ across disciplines, who together can learn from one another to ensure rigorous, transparent, and reliable research and foster healthier research culture.
 
Bridging this gap, in their Stage 1 Registered Report, Field and colleagues (2024) outline their plans for a large-scale Delphi study to evaluate academics' perceived levels of importance of the most crucial elements of RCR and how these align and differ across disciplines. First, they plan to assemble a Delphi panel of RCR experts across multiple disciplines who will evaluate a list of RCR dimensions to suggest any additions. Then, these same panellists will judge each RCR dimension on its importance within their discipline of expertise, with iterative rounds of ratings until stability is reached. In this latter phase, the goal is to probe which items are more broadly appreciated by the sample (i.e., those that are perceived as a universally valuable RCR practice), versus which might be more discipline specific. The findings will present the median importance ratings and categories of response agreement across the entire panel and between different disciplines. Finally, to contextualise these findings, the team will analyse qualitative findings from open-ended text responses with a simple form of thematic analysis. From this, the team will develop a framework, using the identified RCR dimensions, that reflects the needs of the academic community. 
 
By mapping a broader multidisciplinary perspective on RCR, this research will fill the gap between the two extremes that existing conceptualisations of RCR tend to fall under: high-level frameworks designed to be universally applicable across all disciplines (e.g., the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity) and prescriptive guides tailored to the practical instruction of researchers within a specific discipline or field (e.g., RCR training designed for members of a university department). The hope is that this will stimulate a more nuanced understanding and discussion of cross-disciplinary conceptions of RCR.
 
Five expert reviewers with field expertise assessed the Stage 1 manuscript over two rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed and informed responses to the reviewer’s comments, the recommenders 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/xmnu5
 
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
 
Field, S. M., Thompson, J., van Drimmelen, T., Ferrar, J., Penders, B., de Rijcke, S., & Munafò, M. R. (2024). Mapping Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Responsible Conduct of Research: A Delphi Study. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/xmnu5
Mapping Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Responsible Conduct of Research: A Delphi StudySarahanne M. Field, Jackie Thompson, Tom van Drimmelen, Jennifer Ferrar, Bart Penders, Sarah de Rijcke, and Marcus R. Munafò<p>Responsible conduct of research (RCR) is generally agreed to be a laudable goal. It promotes high quality research practices, which should lead to more credible findings, and instill confidence in the research community. However, it is as yet u...Social sciencesCharlotte Pennington2023-05-19 15:27:54 View
01 Jun 2024
STAGE 1

Can Imagining Actions as Occurring Involuntarily Cause Intentional Behaviour to Feel Involuntary?

Can the sense of agency and reality be altered by our meta-cognitive models?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Zoltan Kekecs and Sophie Siestrup
Alterations in subjective experience, including alterations in the sense of agency (SoA) and reality (SoR), are commonly implicated in direct-verbal suggestions, such as hypnotic suggestions. Although extensively studied, how direct-verbal suggestions can alter the SoA and SoR is not understood (e.g., see Martin & Pacherie, 2019; Zahedi et al., 2024). One class of theories postulates that the alterations in SoA and SoR are related to meta-cognition. For instance, the intention to move or form a mental image can be kept out of conscious awareness, creating a sense of involuntariness (Dienes & Perner, 2007).

Relying on this theory, in the current study Sheldrake and Dienes (2024) postulate that the metacognitive processes related to these alterations can occur by appropriate use of imagination. In other words, by imagining the movement or object to be hallucinated and further imagining the underlying process was outside of awareness, one can elicit alterations in SoA and SoR. To this end, an intervention is devised whereby the participant is repeatedly asked to consider what might help or hinder them from imagining they are unaware of the relevant intention and thereby adjust their imagination. A control group will be asked to increase the feeling of involuntariness or altered reality simply by repeated practice. Afterward, participants will be asked in a test phase the extent to which the suggested experience felt involuntary.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over three 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/f8hsd
 
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. Dienes, Z. & Perner, J. (2007). Executive control without conscious awareness: The cold control theory of hypnosis. In G. A. Jamieson (Ed.), Hypnosis and conscious states: The cognitive neuroscience perspective (pp. 293-314). Oxford University Press.
 
2. Martin, J. R. & Pacherie, E. (2019). Alterations of agency in hypnosis: A new predictive coding model. Psychol Rev, 126(1), 133-152. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000134
 
3. Sheldrake, K. & Dienes, Z. (2043). Can Imagining Actions as Occurring Involuntarily Cause Intentional Behaviour to Feel Involuntary? In principle acceptance of Version 6 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/f8hsd
 
4. Zahedi, A., Lynn, S. J., & Sommer, W. (2024). Cognitive Simulation along with Neural Adaptation Explain Effects of Suggestions: A Novel Theoretical Framework. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1388347
Can Imagining Actions as Occurring Involuntarily Cause Intentional Behaviour to Feel Involuntary?Kevin Sheldrake, Zoltan Dienes<p>The cold control theory of response to imaginative suggestions calling for distortions in veridical experience (including hypnotic suggestions) states that behavioural and cognitive responses are generated intentionally, but are perceived as in...Social sciencesAnoushiravan Zahedi Zoltan Kekecs2023-11-25 16:24:53 View
31 May 2024
STAGE 1

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

Social media positivity bias

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Linda Kaye, 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, however. 
 
In the present study, Masciantonio and colleagues (2024) will test positivity bias in the context of three social media platforms: Facebook, Instagram, and X. The experiment involves recruiting participants into platform-specific user groups and crafting posts to be shared with friends as well as respective social media audiences. If positivity bias manifests in this context, the social media posts 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.
 
The Stage 1 plan was reviewed by four independent experts representing relevant areas of methodological and topic expertise. Three reviewers proceeded throughout three rounds of review, after which the study was considered having met all Stage 1 criteria and the recommender granted in-principle acceptance. 
 
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 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. 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. (2024). Unveiling the Positivity Bias on Social Media: A Registered Experimental Study On Facebook, Instagram, And X. In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/9z6hm
Unveiling the Positivity Bias on Social Media: A Registered Experimental Study On Facebook, Instagram, And XA. Masciantonio, N. Heiser, A. Cherbonnier<p>Social media has transformed how people engage with the world around them. The positivity bias on social media, in particular, warrants in-depth investigation. This is particularly true as previous research has concentrated on one specific plat...Social sciencesVeli-Matti Karhulahti2024-01-15 10:33:52 View
31 May 2024
STAGE 1

Representativeness heuristic in intuitive predictions: Replication Registered Report of problems reviewed in Kahneman and Tversky (1973)

The Representativeness Heuristic Revisited: Registered Replication Report of Kahneman and Tversky (1973)

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Peter Anthony White, Regis Kakinohana and Naseem Dillman-Hasso
Revisiting a true classic, this registered replication report addresses Kahneman and Tversky’s (1973) introduction of the representativeness heuristic. The heuristic refers to deviations of judgments from normative evaluations of the evidence when the stimulus fits to a prototype. For instance, when an individual is described by features stereotypically associated with a certain target group (e.g., a person who attends dance training several times a week and has a passion for singing and performing), likelihood judgments that the individual belongs to a target group (K-Pop artists) compared to a non-target group (e.g., accountants) are inflated. 

The impact of the original research on the field is clearly immense and long-lasting. All the better that a systematic replication attempt is being undertaken in this registered report, which addresses studies 1 through 7 of Kahneman and Tversky’s classic 1973 paper. Chan and Feldman (2024) propose a well-powered online study, in which all studies from the original article are presented to participants within-subjects. The materials are carefully constructed and closely documented in the accompanying OSF project, where in-depth information on planned data analyses is supported with a simulated dataset.  

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over three 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/er2cq
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. Data collection commenced during the later part of Stage 1 peer review; however, since no substantive 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

1. Chan, H. C. & Feldman, G. (2024). Representativeness heuristic in intuitive predictions: Replication Registered Report of problems reviewed in Kahneman and Tversky (1973). In principle acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/er2cq
 
2. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80(4), 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034747
 
Representativeness heuristic in intuitive predictions: Replication Registered Report of problems reviewed in Kahneman and Tversky (1973)Hong Ching (Bruce) Chan, 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 sciencesRima-Maria Rahal2023-11-29 15:19:07 View
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 Ambiguity

Does familiarity really breed contempt?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO 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 AmbiguityZöe 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 sciencesYuki Yamada Zoltan Kekecs2023-07-11 12:33:00 View
30 May 2024
STAGE 1

Gaming Disorder: A Qualitative Meta-synthesis of Case Studies

What can qualitative research tell us about Gaming Disorder?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO and ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Simone Amendola, Gemma Lucy Smart and Ting Pan
How can qualitative research and case studies inform theoretical models of gaming disorder? Gaming Disorder has generated a large amount of research, with up to 95% of it focusing on quantitative studies. As a result, most of the meta-analyses and review studies focus on quantitative research and disregard qualitative approaches. However, studying the direct experiences of gamers can provide more detailed and direct evidence that can feed into theoretical models. 
 
In this Stage 1 manuscript, Auranen et al. (2024) will perform a qualitative meta-analysis of gaming disorder case studies, case reports, and case series of treatment-seekers using a 3-phase approach. First, they will focus on examining the reported problems of participants, the reported reasons for seeking help to reduce their gaming, and the causal link between gaming and reported problems, including the context of these problematic behaviors. Second, thematic synthesis will generate construct themes regarding the contexts of the individuals and the reported problems. Lastly, the authors will examine the relevance of findings in regards to the coping model, value fulfillment theory and the theory of cultural dissonance.
 
The Stage 1 submission was evaluated by the recommender and three expert reviewers, one of which was recused due to conflicts of interest that emerged after the first round of revisions. The recommender and co-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/hzc5a
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 4. At least some of the data/evidence that will be used to answer the research question already exists AND is accessible in principle to the authors (e.g. residing in a public database or with a colleague), BUT the authors certify that they have not yet accessed any part of that data/evidence.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References

Auranen, T., Adamkovič, M., Martončik, M., Park, S., Kauraoja, V., Siutila, M., Jin, Y., & Karhulahti, V.-M. (2024). Gaming Disorder: A qualitative meta-synthesis of related case studies. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/hzc5a
Gaming Disorder: A Qualitative Meta-synthesis of Case StudiesTiina Auranen, Matúš Adamkovič, Veli-Matti Karhulahti, Marcel Martoncik, Yaewon Jin, Miia Siutila, Valtteri Kauraoja, Solip Park<p>Several meta-analyses and reviews have been published on gaming-related health problems, which are today studied mainly in the context of the World Health Organization’s new mental disorder construct, “gaming disorder”. However, none of those r...Medical Sciences, Social sciencesMateo Leganes-Fonteneau Ting Pan2023-11-24 14:00:19 View
30 May 2024
STAGE 1
article picture

The role of resource dynamics in the distribution of life cycles within a female human population

An agent-based model of the role of resource dynamics and the environment in human female life cycles

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Cecilia Padilla-Iglesias and 1 anonymous reviewer
Among primates, the human female life cycle appears special. Aspects of these life cycles have been linked to the acquisition and distribution of resources and to environmental factors, as well as to individual differences across human females. Many questions remain regarding the causal roles that these (or also other) factors might have played in the evolution of human female life cycles – and also whether generalizing statements about these life cycles can adequately capture the wide range of the observed phenomena.
 
In the current study, Varas Enriquez et al. (2024) outline a plan for an agent-based model approach to study the factors that guide and channel variability in female life cycles in humans (within biological constraints), via the effects that their model will capture. The authors’ model has a particular eye towards the effects of resource dynamics (resource production and resource transfers) and environmental conditions – and their interplay. The results of this agent based model will be thoroughly analysed to better understand the evolution of the specific female human life cycle range.
 
The study plan was refined after one round of review, which led to input from two external reviewers and the recommender. The revised (second) version was judged to satisfy the Stage 1 criteria for in-principle acceptance.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/24c7z
 
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 (e.g. conservative statistical threshold; recruitment of a blinded analyst; robustness testing, multiverse/specification analysis, or other approach)
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
Varas Enríquez, P. J., Lukas, D., Colleran, H, Mulder, M. B., & Redhead, D. (2024) The role of resource dynamics in the distribution of life cycles within a female human population. In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/24c7z
The role of resource dynamics in the distribution of life cycles within a female human populationPablo J. Varas Enríquez, Daniel Redhead, Monique Borgerhoff Mulder, Heidi Colleran, Dieter Lukas<p>The evolution of the female human life cycle, which is characterised by having a reproductive career nested within juvenile and post-reproductive periods, has been linked to the surplus of adult resource production and downwards inter-generatio...Life Sciences, Medical Sciences, Social sciencesClaudio Tennie2023-11-13 15:45:52 View