Submit a report


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 will 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.



Exploring How Members of Illicit Networks Navigate Investigative Interviewsuse asterix (*) to get italics
David A. Neequaye, Pär Anders Granhag, Timothy LukePlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
<p>This study explored how members of an illicit network navigate investigative interviews probing their crimes. We examined how perceived disclosure outcomes, namely, the projected costs and benefits, affect what members choose to reveal. We recruited N = 22 groups, maximum of six participants per group. Each group assumed the role of an illicit network and planned for possible interviews with investigators probing into the legitimacy of a business the network owns. All participants underwent an interview after the group planning stage. The results indicated that network members navigate the dilemma interviews bring by disclosing information they perceive would likely yield beneficial (or desirable) rather than costly (or undesirable) outcomes. Additionally, much of the participants’ sensitivity to potential costs and benefits was explained by the group of which they are a part: different networks likely respond to costs and benefits in unique ways. This work contributes to understanding how illicit networks manage information disclosure in investigative interviews.</p>
You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
criminal networks, decision-making, disclosure, investigative interviewing, terror groups
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Humanities, Social sciences
No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe []
2022-07-11 15:21:09
Zoltan Dienes