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
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 Effect

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO 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 sciencesRima-Maria Rahal Liesbeth Mann, Vanessa Clemens2023-11-30 12:32:25 View
11 Apr 2024
STAGE 1

Does retrieval practice protect memory against stress? A meta-analysis [Stage 1 Registered Report]

Can retrieval practice prevent the negative impact of acute stress on memory performance?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Chris Hartgerink (they/them) and Adrien Fillon
There are a number of broad assumptions about memory which have penetrated societal understanding and mostly reflect supporting academic evidence e.g., that acute stress can compromise memory performance (Shields et al., 2017) and that practicing recalling critical information can help retain that knowledge (Moriera et al., 2019). The evidence base is less consistent when evaluating whether retrieval practice can protect against the negative effects of acute stress on memory, despite it being highly important for educators as to whether this specific strategy for supporting memorisation can be evidenced as especially effective under stressful conditions. A rigorous review of this mixed evidence base could provide the basis for developments in memory theory and research practice, with potential for direct educational applications.
 
Meta-analyses can play a critical role in furthering our understanding of complex cognitive mechanisms where the evidence base includes a wide range of methods, factors and effect size estimates. Furthermore, there is a lack of rigorous meta-analyses that prioritise open and reproducible processes (Topor et al., 2022) which help role-model good practice. In the current Registered Report, Mihaylova et al. (2024) have proposed a rigorous meta-analysis to systematically review and synthesise the evidence on the effects of retrieval practice for memory performance under acute stress. The work looks to be especially valuable for a) informing future research directions through a structured risk of bias evaluation, and b) generating theoretical developments through a range of confirmatory moderators (including stressor types, memory strategies, time of delay and task type). The findings of the planned analyses are expected to be of immediate interest to educational and occupational domains where memory recall is a priority.
 
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/pkrzb
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 3. At least some data/evidence that will be used to the answer the research question has been previously accessed by the authors (e.g. downloaded or otherwise received), but the authors certify that they have not yet observed ANY part of the data/evidence.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1. Mihaylova, M., Kliegel, M, & Rothen, N. (2024). Does retrieval practice protect memory against stress? A meta-analysis. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/pkrzb
 
2. Moreira, B. F. T., Pinto, T. S. S., Starling, D. S. V., & Jaeger, A. (2019). Retrieval practice in classroom settings: A review of applied research. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 4, p. 5). Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00005 
 
3. Shields, G. S., Sazma, M. A., McCullough, A. M., & Yonelinas, A. P. (2017). The effects of acute stress on episodic memory: A meta-analysis and integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 143, 636–675. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000100 
 
4. Topor, M. K., Pickering, J. S., Mendes, A. B., Bishop, D., Büttner, F., Elsherif, M. M., ... & Westwood, S. (2022). An integrative framework for planning and conducting Non-Intervention, Reproducible, and Open Systematic Reviews (NIRO-SR). Meta-Psychology. https://osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/8gu5z
Does retrieval practice protect memory against stress? A meta-analysis [Stage 1 Registered Report]Mariela Mihaylova, Matthias Kliegel, Nicolas Rothen<p>[Note: This is a Stage 1 Registered Report. All placeholders will be replaced with actual results by Stage 2.]</p> <p><br>Stressors such as test anxiety (TA) are known to decrease memory retrieval, whereas retrieval practice (RP) is the phenom...Humanities, Social sciencesThomas Evans2023-02-16 14:39:06 View
11 Apr 2024
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Managing Disclosure Outcomes in Intelligence Interviews

Managing costs and rewards when choosing to disclose information

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Yikang Zhang and Tyler Jacobs
An interviewee in an intelligence interview can face competing interests in disclosing information: The value in cooperating because, for example, information given leads to the arrest of a narcotics gang, making the neighbourhood safer; and the risk that disclosing the information leads to reprisals from the gang. Different pieces of information will compete with each other for disclosure, depending on this balance of risks to self-interest. According to the disclosure-outcomes management model of Neequaye et al., information will be disclosed more with a high than low probability of reward, as might be straightforwardly expected, but this difference will be larger when there is a low probability of cost rather than a high probability. The high probability of cost will induce more a variable response to the possible benefits.

Neequaye et al. (2024) invited participants to assume the role of an informant, with the goal of maximizing their points according to stated probabilities of costs and benefits of disclosing pieces of information relating to given scenarios. The degree to which each type of information was disclosed in a subsequent interview wase assessed. Perceived benefits positively influenced the likelihood of disclosing information. The crucial interaction, obtained in a Pilot study, was not significant in the pre-registered replication. The study had decent power to pick up an interaction the same size as found in the pilot, but not half the size, which would still have been interesting.
 
The Stage 2 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 2 criteria.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/ru8j5

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
 
Neequaye, D. A., Luke, T. J., & Kollback, K. (2024). Managing Disclosure Outcomes in Intelligence Interviews [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 11 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/tfp2c
Managing Disclosure Outcomes in Intelligence InterviewsDavid A. Neequaye, Timothy J. Luke, Kristina Kollback<p>We introduce the disclosure-outcomes management model. The model views disclosure in intelligence interviews as a behavior interviewees use to profitably navigate self-interest dilemmas. We theorized that interviewees compare the potential outc...Social sciencesZoltan Dienes2024-02-29 17:26:19 View
11 Apr 2024
STAGE 1

Managing Disclosure Outcomes in Intelligence Interviews

Managing costs and rewards when choosing to disclose information

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Jason Chin, Yikang Zhang and Tyler Jacobs
An interviewee in an intelligence interview can face competing interests in disclosing information: The value in cooperating because, for example, information given leads to the arrest of a narcotics gang, making the neighbourhood safer; and the risk that disclosing the information leads to reprisals from the gang. Different pieces of information will compete with each other for disclosure, depending on this balance of risks to self-interest. According to the disclosure-outcomes management model of Neequaye et al., information will be disclosed more with a high than low probability of reward, as might be straightforwardly expected, but this difference will be larger when there is a low probability of cost rather than a high probability. The high probability of cost will induce more a variable response to the possible benefits.

Neequaye et al. (2023) will invite participants to assume the role of an informant, with the goal of maximizing their points according to stated probabilities of costs and benefits of disclosing pieces of information relating to given scenarios. Then the degree to which each type of information is disclosed in a subsequent interview will be assessed: this way the crucial interaction can be tested.
 
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/ru8j5

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
 
Neequaye, D. A., Luke, T. J., & Kollback, K. (2023). Managing Disclosure Outcomes in Intelligence Interviews, in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/ru8j5
Managing Disclosure Outcomes in Intelligence InterviewsDavid A. Neequaye, Timothy J. Luke, and Kristina Kollback, Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg.<p>We introduce the disclosure-outcomes management model. The model views disclosure in intelligence interviews as a behavior interviewees use to profitably navigate self-interest dilemmas. We theorize that interviewees compare the potential outco...Social sciencesZoltan Dienes2022-09-15 15:03:59 View
10 Apr 2024
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Cue-based modulation of pain stimulus expectation: do ongoing oscillations reflect changes in pain perception? A Registered Report

Understanding oscillatory correlates of pain expectation

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Zoltan Dienes, Chris Chambers and Markus Ploner
Recent studies using an EEG frequency tagging approach have reported modulations of alpha, beta and theta bands at the stimulation frequency during nociceptive/painful thermal stimulation compared to non-nociceptive/non-painful vibrotactile stimulation. Prior expectations of the intensity of upcoming painful stimuli are known to strongly modulate the subjective experience of those stimuli. Thus, modulating the expectation of pain should result in a change in the modulation of oscillations if these factors are indeed linked.
 
In this study, Leu, Glineur and Liberati modulated expectations of pain (low or high intensity) in 40 participants prior to delivering thermal cutaneous stimulation (low, medium or high intensity). They recorded how intense participants expected the pain to be, and how intense they felt it to be, as well as EEG to assess oscillatory differences across the expectation and intensity conditions.
 
The results confirmed that there was a strong effect of expectation on the perceived stimulus intensity. However, contrary to the hypotheses, this was not reflected in the cortical oscillations. Overall this indicates a possible dissociation between perceived pain and modulation of ongoing oscillations in the theta, alpha and beta bands. 
 
The Stage 2 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 2 criteria and awarded a positive recommendation.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/y6fb8
 
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. Leu, C., Glineur, E. & Liberati, G. (2023). Cue-based modulation of pain stimulus expectation: do ongoing oscillations reflect changes in pain perception? [Stage 2] Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/awrge
Cue-based modulation of pain stimulus expectation: do ongoing oscillations reflect changes in pain perception? A Registered ReportChiara Leu, Esther Glineur, Giulia Liberati<p style="text-align: justify;">A promising stream of investigations is targeting ongoing neural oscillations and whether their modulation could be related to the perception of pain. Using an electroencephalography (EEG) frequency tagging approach...Life Sciences, Medical SciencesGemma Learmonth 2024-01-23 19:35:39 View
08 Apr 2024
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Applying a Synergistic Mindsets Intervention to an Esports Context

Synergistic Mindset Intervention in Competitive Situations

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Lee Moore, Ivan Ropovik and Jacob Keech
Mindset theories suggest that the mere belief in the malleability of human abilities can help one to develop related performance. On the other hand, one and the same performance situation can also be experienced in various affective ways, which differently contribute to performance outcomes. One theoretically justifiable premise is that appraising a performance situation as a “threat” instead of “challenge” is associated with maladaptive responses, such as impaired cardiovascular mobilization. If people could experience performance situations as positive challenges, this might also improve performance outcomes. Drawing from these connected premises, the synergistic mindset intervention was developed and tentatively found to help adolescents in stressful situations (Yeager et al., 2022).
 
In the present registered report, Behnke et al. (2024) built on the above to test whether the synergistic mindset intervention can help individuals in competitive gaming situations. The authors utilized one of the leading esport games, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive​, and recruited its active players (N=300) into randomized control and intervention groups. The participants competed in a cash-prize tournament involving measures of affective experience and cardiovascular responses. Behnke et al. (2024) hypothesized the synergistic mindset group (SMI) to show greater challenge affective responses and superior performance outcomes. 
 
Although the SMI produced a number of positive outcomes such as more beneficial stress mindsets, the hypotheses were not corroborated but the results supported a null. This may be related to the observation that participants generally experienced the intervention positively, which, in turn, limits the potential for improving affective and physiological responses. These rigorous null results are informative by directing the SMI research program toward test designs where more participants experience strong negative stress responses. Moreover, the results encourage researchers to reassess the underlying auxiliary hypotheses regarding affective responses and performance outcomes, the relationships of which may be complicated by situational factors that are not yet fully understood.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over one round of in-depth review. Three out of the four Stage 1 experts returned to review and, due to the study’s exceptionally high level of transparency, the reviewers had only minor requests for revision. As all the requested revisions were implemented carefully, 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/z3adb
 
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. Behnke M., Lakens D., Petrova K., Chwiłkowska P., Kaczmarek L. D., Jamieson J. P., & Gross J. J. (2024) Applying a Synergistic Mindsets Intervention to an Esports Context. Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports https://osf.io/53z8e
 
2. Yeager D.S., Bryan C.J., Gross J.J., Murray J., Krettek D., Santos P., ... & Jamieson J.P. (2022) A synergistic mindsets intervention protects adolescents from stress. Nature 607, 512–520. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04907-7
 
Applying a Synergistic Mindsets Intervention to an Esports ContextMaciej Behnke, Daniël Lakens, Kate Petrova, Patrycja Chwiłkowska, Szymon Jęśko Białek, Maciej Kłoskowski, Wadim Krzyżaniak, Patryk Maciejewski, Lukasz D. Kaczmarek, Kacper Szymański, Jeremy P. Jamieson, James J. Gross<p>Affective responses during stressful, high-stakes situations can play an important role in shaping performance. For example, feeling shaky and nervous at a job interview can undermine performance, whereas feeling excited during that same interv...Social sciencesVeli-Matti Karhulahti2024-02-02 17:57:13 View
28 Mar 2024
STAGE 1

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

A closer look at working memory changing with adversity

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

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

Impulsivity and online sports betting behaviour: Untangling the causal relationship (ISPO study)

Examining the causal pathways from impulsivity to disordered gambling in online sports betting

Recommended by based on reviews by 2 anonymous reviewers
Online sports betting is becoming increasingly popular worldwide, which has raised concerns about the negative consequences it has on both individual health and public health. To prevent and reduce these negative consequences, it is important to understand how gambling-related harms arise in the context of online sports betting. 

Impulsivity has long been recognized as a risk factor for disordered gambling, yet how impulsivity may lead to gambling-related harms is not entirely clear. In the current study, Jacob and colleagues (2024) aim to examine this question using a longitudinal cross-lagged panel design. Regular online sports bettors will be invited to fill out measures of impulsivity (including impulsive choice, impulsive action, and impulsivity personality) and gambling disorder symptoms three times at three-month intervals. Player tracking data on these players' online betting behavior in these three-month intervals will then be retrieved from the online gambling provider. Combining these data provides a unique opportunity to test the hypotheses that impulsivity may lead to riskier online gambling behavior, which in turn may lead to more gambling-related problems later on. The results of the current study will offer novel insights into the causal pathways from impulsivity to disordered gambling in online sports betting, and may also inform the development of early prevention strategies to reduce gambling-related harms.

The current 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/7wsfh
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 3. At least some data/evidence that will be used to the answer the research question has been previously accessed by the authors (e.g. downloaded or otherwise received), but the authors certify that they have not yet observed ANY part of the data/evidence.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
References
 
1. Jacob, A., Joshanloo, M., Czernecka, R., & Kräplin, A. (2024). Impulsivity and online sports betting behavior: Untangling the causal relationship. In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/7wsfh
Impulsivity and online sports betting behaviour: Untangling the causal relationship (ISPO study)Anne Jacob, Mohsen Joshanloo, Robert Czernecka, Anja Kräplin, <p>The rapid expansion of online sports betting has raised concerns about its potential impact on individual health and public health. In order to further develop etiological models for gambling disorder (GD) in sports betting, it is essential to ...Social sciencesZhang Chen2023-10-16 13:58:01 View
27 Mar 2024
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)

Registered Report: Are anticipatory auditory predictions enhanced in tinnitus and independent of hearing loss?

Evidence for the role of predictive coding in subjective tinnitus

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Will Sedley, Pia Brinkmann and Emilie Cardon
Subjective tinnitus is a common disorder in which people experience a persistent sound in the absence of any external source. The underlying causes of tinnitus are debated – although the condition is strongly associated with hearing loss resulting from auditory damage, much remains to be understood about the neural processes that give rise to the phantom perception. Various classes of neurophysiological theories have been proposed, including the “altered gain” model – in which neurons in the auditory pathway increase their responsiveness to compensate for reduced auditory input following hearing loss – and the “noise cancellation” model – in which disrupted feedback connections from limbic regions are unable to tune out phantom signals. Although these theories account for much observed data, they have not been conclusively supported, and their ability to explain tinnitus is limited by the fact that hearing loss and tinnitus can arise independently and at different times.
 
In the current study, Reisinger et al. (2024) tested an emerging alternative theory based on a Bayesian predictive-coding framework (Sedley et al., 2016) in which the alteration of perceptual priors leads the auditory system to expect a sound that, if functioning normally, it should not expect. Using magnetoencephalography (MEG) in a sample of tinnitus patients (and carefully-matched controls for age, gender, and level of hearing loss), they asked whether tinnitus is associated with anticipatory brain activation, tuned to the carrier-frequency of an expected auditory stimulus. Specifically, the authors predicted that if the predictive-coding framework is correct then individuals with tinnitus should show different regularity-dependent pre-activations of carrier- frequency-specific information compared to the control group, while tone carrier-frequencies should be processed normally in tinnitus patients. They also predicted that any such pre-activations should not be related to levels of reported subjective tinnitus distress, as measured with the short version of the Tinnitus Questionnaire (mini-TQ).
 
The results broadly confirmed the hypotheses, with some caveats. Statistically significant differences in regularity-dependent pre-activations were observed between the tinnitus and control groups, however – curiously – the effects appear to be driven by below-chance decoding in the control group, complicating the interpretration. At the same time, consistent with expectations, frequency processing did not differ significantly between individuals with and without tinnitus, and the observed pre-activations were not significantly related to tinnitus distress. Overall, the findings cautiously support the conclusion that chronic tinnitus is associated with maladaptively upregulated predictive neural processing, and that this phenomenon is unlikely to be explained by either tinnitus distress or hearing loss.
 
The Stage 2 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 2 criteria and awarded a positive recommendation.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/6gvpy
 
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 yet observed any part of the data/evidence prior to Stage 1 IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals: 
 
 
References
 
1. Reisinger, L., Demarchi, G., Rösch, , S., Trinka, E., Obleser, L., & Weisz, N. (2024). Registered Report: Are anticipatory auditory predictions enhanced in tinnitus and independent of hearing loss? [Stage 2] Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/9wqjh
 
2. Sedley, W., Friston, K. J., Gander, P. E., Kumar, S., & Griffiths, T. D. (2016). An integrative tinnitus model based on sensory precision. Trends in Neurosciences, 39, 799-812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2016.10.004
Registered Report: Are anticipatory auditory predictions enhanced in tinnitus and independent of hearing loss?L. Reisinger, G. Demarchi, S. Rösch, E. Trinka, J. Obleser, N. Weisz<p>Phantom perceptions occur without any identifiable environmental or bodily source. The mechanisms and key drivers behind phantom perceptions like tinnitus are not well understood. The dominant “altered-gain”-framework suggests that tinnitus res...Life SciencesChris Chambers2024-02-21 16:17:33 View
27 Mar 2024
STAGE 1

Registered Report: Are anticipatory predictions enhanced in tinnitus and independent of hearing loss?

Can predictive coding explain subjective tinnitus?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Will Sedley, Pia Brinkmann and Emilie Cardon
Subjective tinnitus is a common disorder in which people experience a persistent sound in the absence of any external source. The underlying causes of tinnitus are debated – although the condition is strongly associated with hearing loss resulting from auditory damage, much remains to be understood about the neural processes that give rise to the phantom perception. Various classes of neurophysiological theories have been proposed, including the “altered gain” model – in which neurons in the auditory pathway increase their responsiveness to compensate for reduced auditory input following hearing loss – and the “noise cancellation” model –  in which disrupted feedback connections from limbic regions are unable to tune out phantom signals. Although these theories account for much observed data, they have not been conclusively supported, and their ability to explain tinnitus is limited by the fact that hearing loss and tinnitus can arise independently and at different times.
 
In the current study, Reisinger et al. (2023) will test an emerging alternative theory based on a Bayesian predictive-coding framework (Sedley et al., 2016) in which the alteration of perceptual priors leads the auditory system to expect a sound that, if functioning normally, it should not expect. Using magnetoencephalography (MEG) in a sample of tinnitus patients (and carefully-matched controls for age, gender, and level of hearing loss), they will ask whether tinnitus is associated with anticipatory brain activation, tuned to the carrier-frequency of an expected auditory stimulus. Specifically, the authors predict that if the predictive-coding framework is correct then individuals with tinnitus should show different regularity-dependent pre-activations of carrier- frequency-specific information compared to the control group, while tone carrier-frequencies should be processed normally in tinnitus patients. They also predict that any such pre-activations should not be related to levels of reported subjective tinnitus distress, as measured with the short version of the Tinnitus Questionnaire (mini-TQ).
 
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/6gvpy
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 3. At least some data/evidence that will be used to the answer the research question has been previously accessed by the authors (e.g. downloaded or otherwise received), but the authors certify that they have not yet observed ANY part of the data/evidence.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals: 
 
 
References
 
Reisinger, L., Demarchi, G., Rösch, , S., Trinka, E., Obleser, L., & Weisz, N.  (2023). Registered Report: Are anticipatory predictions enhanced in tinnitus and independent of hearing loss? In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/6gvpy
 
Sedley, W., Friston, K. J., Gander, P. E., Kumar, S., & Griffiths, T. D. (2016). An integrative tinnitus model based on sensory precision. Trends in Neurosciences, 39, 799-812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2016.10.004
Registered Report: Are anticipatory predictions enhanced in tinnitus and independent of hearing loss?L. Reisinger, G. Demarchi, S. Rösch, E. Trinka, J. Obleser, N. Weisz<p>Phantom perceptions occur without any identifiable environmental or bodily source. The mechanisms and key drivers behind phantom perceptions like tinnitus are not well understood. The dominant view suggests that tinnitus results from hyperactiv...Life SciencesChris Chambers2023-01-03 08:35:12 View