We may not believe what our memory tells us: Memory may deliver a compelling recollection we believe did not happen (we know we were not there at the time); and we may know an event happened that we fail to remember (even for when we were not drunk!). That is, there can be distrust in remembering and distrust in forgetting. Previous work by the authors has looked at this through a signal detection lens, reporting in separate studies that people who have distrust in remembering have either a high or low criterion for saying "old" (Zhang et al, 2023, 2024a). A plausible explanation for these contrasting results is that the criterion can either be the means by which false memories are generated enabling the distrust (low criterion); or rather, in conditions where accuracy is at stake, the means for compensating for the distrust (high criterion).

 

In the current study by Zhang et al (2024b), participants will be incentivised to be as accurate as possible, and in a memory test given feedback about commission errors or, in another group, ommission errors. As a manipulation check, the authors will test that the feedback increases distrust in remembering or distrust in forgetting, respectively, compared to a no feedback control group. Crucially, the authors hypothesize that people will adjust the criterion to say "old" in a compensatory way in each group. The study uses inference by intervals to provide a fairly severe test of this hypothesis.

 

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over multiple 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/x69qt
 
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:

 

 

 

1. Zhang, Y., Qi, F., Otgaar, H., Nash, R. A., & Jelicic, M. (2023). A Tale of Two Distrusts: Memory Distrust towards Commission and Omission Errors in the Chinese Context. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000134

 

2. Zhang, Y., Otgaar, H., Nash, R. A., & Rosar, L. (2024). Time and memory distrust shape the dynamics of recollection and belief-in-occurrence. Memory, 32, 484–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2024.2336166

 

3. Zhang, Y., Otgaar, H., Nash, R. A., & Li, C. (2024b). The effects of memory distrust toward commission and omission on recollection-belief correspondence and memory errors. In principle acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/x69qt

 

The reward value of a stimulus is based on an error in prediction: Things going better than predicted. Could this learning principle, often tested on short acting stimuli, also apply to a long lasting episode, like going for a run? Could how rewarding a run is be based on the run going better than predicted?

 

Understanding the conditions under which exercise is pleasurable could of course be relevant to tempting people to do more of it! In the current study, Brevers et al. (2024) asked people before a daily run to predict the amount of perceived exertion they would experience; then just after the run, to rate the retrospective amount of perceived exertion actually experienced. The difference between the two ratings was the prediction error. Participants also rated their remembered pleasure in running. As hypothesized, the authors found that running pleasure increased linearly with how much retrospective exertion was than predicted.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript received one round of review from two external reviewers, then some minor comments from the recommender, after which it was judged to satisfy the Stage 2 criteria and was awarded a positive recommendation.

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/xh724
 
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. Brevers, D., Martinent, G., Oz, I. T., Desmedt, O. & de Geus, B. (2024). Do prediction errors of perceived exertion inform the level of running pleasure? [Stage 2]. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/xfgqp

People can represent quantities in different ways. Numbers can be represented non-symbolically through an Object Tracking System (for small quantities, when one immediately perceives how many objects are there) and an Approximate Number System (for large quantities), and symbolically, for example with Arabic symbols or words. One unresolved question is the extent to which using these numerical representations, and transferring between them, can be done automatically, or rather involves components of working memory. Key relevant working memory components are the phonological loop and the visuospatial sketchpad.
 
In this study, Xenidou-Dervou and colleagues (2025) asked subjects to perform a dot comparison task with small and large numbers, to engage the non-symbolic systems, and a digit comparison task, to engage the symbolic system, and a cross modal task to engage translation between the systems. Participants either performed these tasks alone or with a secondary task, one that loaded either the phonological loop or else the visuospatial sketchpad. In the comparison of symbolic numerals, the visual secondary task itself was performed more poorly in dual rather than single task conditions, indicating the involvement of the visual spatial sketchpad in use of symbolic numerals. The visual secondary task interfered with non-symbolic number judgements, indicating involvement of the visuospatial sketch pad with the non-symbolic system as well. Finally, the translation between the systems also involved the visuospatial sketchpad, as shown by the secondary task itself suffering dual task interference. In sum, there was evidence for the visuospatial sketchpad, but not for the phonological loop, playing a role in simple comparisons using either or both of the symbolic and non-symbolic number systems. 

The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers’ comments and edits to the Stage 2 report, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria for recommendation.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/32qdw
 
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:

 

 

 

Xenidou-Dervou, I., Appleton, C., Rossi, S., Guy, N., & Gilmore, C. (2025). Can adults automatically process and translate between numerical representations? [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/me6tn

Rhythmic changes in pain can lead to corresponding modulations of EEG amplitudes in theta, alpha, and beta bands. But the question remains open as to whether these modulations are actually tracking pain, or maybe rather saliency or stimulus intensity. The question is of some importance because a marker of pain per se could be useful for tracking felt pain without a verbal response, and could be useful in investigating interventions for treating pain (such as suggestion).  Here, Leu et al. (2025) addressed the question of whether modulations reflect saliency or else the intensity of pain, by using an oddball paradigm in which most trials are a pain stimulus of a certain intensity, and oddball trials will sometimes occur, at either a higher intensity or a lower intensity than the baseline ones. If the modulations reflected salience, the modulation at the frequency of the oddball would be similar for high and low intensity oddballs. However, if the modulations reflected pain intensity, the modulations for the low rather than high oddball condition would be lower.

 

In fact, the baseline and oddball stimulations were found to be perceived significantly differently only in the high oddball condition; and consistantly, the oddballl stimulus significantly modulated ongoing oscillations in only the high oddball condition. Thus, whether oscillations are modulated by pain intensity or salience could not be picked apart in this study. The study does however raise an important isssue, indicate how it could be addressed, and provide data relevant for clearly resolving the issue in the future.

 

The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth peer review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria for acceptance.

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/qbrf2
 
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., Forest, S., Legrain, V., & Liberati, G. (2025). The effect of stimulus saliency on the modulation of pain-related ongoing neural oscillations: a Registered Report [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/98edq