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 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.


 

Latest recommendationsrssmastodon

IdTitleAuthorsAbstractPictureThematic fieldsRecommenderReviewersSubmission date▲
23 Jan 2023
STAGE 1
toto

Comparing time versus money in sunk cost effects: Replication of Soman (2001)

Are sunk cost effects weaker for time than money?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Johanna Peetz, Christopher Olivola, David Ronayne, Johannes Leder and Dilip Soman
The sunk cost fallacy is a cognitive bias in which people persist with a decision that is no longer optimal because of previous resources they have invested (now considered to be spent or “sunk”). Most of us will have heard sunk costs reflected in the saying “throwing good money after bad”, but sunk costs can, in theory, occur more broadly, whether for money, time or any other resource-limited investment. The sunk cost effect for money has been widely studied and appears robust; in contrast, the sunk cost effect for time is more uncertain, and is potentially moderated by the age of respondents (and likely resource availability), the fact that time is irreplaceable, and the tendency for people to account for time less easily than they do for money. In an impactful study, Soman (2001) found that the sunk cost effect for time was indeed weaker than for money, although this finding has not been widely replicated.
 
In the current study, Petrov et al. (2023) propose a replication of three studies from Soman (2001), asking whether sunk costs are weaker for time than for money, and then testing whether the relative absence of a sunk time cost arises from the inability of participants to account for time or due to more rational beliefs in the evaluation of past time investments.
 
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/65htv
 
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. Soman, D. (2001). The mental accounting of sunk time costs: Why time is not like money. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,14, 169-185. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.370
 
2. Petrov, N. B., Chan, Y. K., Lau, C. N., Kwok, T. H., Chow, L. C., Lo, W. Y. V, Song W., & Feldman, G. (2023). Sunk cost effects for time versus money: Replication of Soman (2001) [Registered Report Stage 1], in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/u34zb
Comparing time versus money in sunk cost effects: Replication of Soman (2001) Nikolay Petrov, Wenkai Song, Yin Kan (Megan) CHAN, Cheuk Nam (Chris) LAU, Tin Ho (Donald) KWOK, Lok Ching (Estelle) CHOW, Wai Yan (Vivian) LO, Gilad Feldman (gfeldman@hku.hk)<p>This is a scheduled PCI-RR snap shot for a planned project: "Comparing time versus money in sunk cost effects: Replication of Soman (2001) ​"</p>Social sciencesChris Chambers2022-02-23 10:39:42 View
09 Jul 2023
STAGE 1
toto

How Intelligence Interviewees Mentally Identify Relevant Information

How an interviewee knows what information is key to disclose or withhold

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by 2 anonymous reviewers
Research on interviewing has often focused on topics (such as aiding memory of witnesses) which presume the interviewee has already correctly identified the precise information that the interviewer is really after. But how does an informant know what sort of information is asked for, a precondition for an informant to then choose to provide the information or withhold it (depending on their own interests)?
 
In this study, Neequaye and Lorson will ask subjects to take the role of an informant about a criminal gang, with the further instructions to be cooperative or resistant in helping the interviewer obtain the information they want. In one study, the participants will be asked merely to identify what information the interviewer wants. In the second study, the participants will answer the interviewer's questions, disclosing whatever information they feel best suits their interest. Crucially, the level of detail of the questions will be manipulated, such that the question specifies a clear objective or not.

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over three rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers’ comments and edits to the stage 1 report, 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/82qtn
 
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. Neequaye, D. A., & Lorson, A. (2022). How Intelligence Interviewees Mentally Identify Relevant Information, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/82qtn
How Intelligence Interviewees Mentally Identify Relevant InformationDavid A. Neequaye & Alexandra Lorson<p>This research explores how intelligence interviewees mentally identify the relevant information at their disposal, which they may or may not disclose. We theorize that interviewees mentally identify applicable information items by estimating th...Humanities, Social sciencesZoltan Dienes2022-02-25 22:20:40 View
21 Nov 2022
STAGE 1
toto

Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012)

Does denial of animal minds explain the "meat paradox"?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Brock Bastian, Ben De Groeve, Florian Lange and Sebastian Berger
The psychology of meat-eating offers a fascinating window into moral reasoning, cognition and emotion, as well as applications in the shift toward more sustainable and ethical alternatives to meat consumption. One key observation in this field is the so-called “meat paradox” – the tendency for people to simultaneously eat meat while also caring about animals. One way to resolve this conflict and reduce cognitive dissonance is for people to separate the concept of meat from animals, mentally disengaging from the origins of meat in order to make the act of consumption more ethically acceptable. Another potential explanation is a motivated “denial of mind”, in which people believe that animals lack the mental capacity to experience suffering; therefore, eating an animal is not a harm that the animal will experience. In support of the latter hypothesis, Bastian et al (2012) found that animals judged to have greater mental capacities were also judged to less edible, and that simply reminding meat eaters that an animal was being raised for the purposes of meat consumption led to denial of its mental capacities.
 
Using a large-scale online design in 1000 participants, Jacobs et al. (2022) propose a replication of two studies from Bastian et al. (2012): asking how the perceived mental capabilities of animals relates to both their perceived edibility and the degree of moral concern they elicit, and whether learning that an animal will be consumed influences perceptions of its mental capabilities. Among various exploratory analyses, the authors will also examine whether the perception of animal minds (in animals consumed for meat) varies systematically according to species.
 
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/cru4z
 
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. Bastian, B., Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., & Radke, H. R. M. (2012). Don’t mind meat? The denial of mind to animals used for human consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211424291
 
2. Jacobs, T. P., Wang, M., Leach, S., Loong, S. H., Khanna, M., Chan, K. W., Chau, H. T., Tam, Y. Y. & Feldman, G. (2022). Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012), in principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/cru4z
Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012) Tyler P. Jacobs, Meiying Wang, Stefan Leach, Siu Ho Loong, Mahika Khanna, Ka Wan Chan, Ho Ting Chau, Yuen Yan Tam, Gilad Feldman<p>This is a scheduled PCI-RR snap shot for a planned project: "Revisiting the motivated denial of mind to animals used for food: Replication and extension of Bastian et al. (2012) ​"</p>Social sciencesChris Chambers Ben De Groeve, Florian Lange, Brock Bastian, Sebastian Berger2022-03-04 04:21:18 View
24 Oct 2022
STAGE 1
toto

Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgery

Is childhood adversity associated with a heightened response to opioids?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Zoltan Dienes, Yuki Yamada and 1 anonymous reviewer
A convergence of evidence suggests that early life adversity may cause dysfunction in opioid-sensitive reward systems. Childhood adversity is associated with opioid use, potentially by altering reward and motivation networks, and experimental models in animals have found that early life adversity increases and consolidates opioid seeking behaviours. Further, in a recent controlled experiment, Carlyle et al. (2021) found that opioid administration produced stronger positive responses, and weaker negative responses, in adults with a history of childhood abuse and neglect.
 
In the current study, Carlyle et al. seek to test the generalisability of these previous findings in a pre-operative clinical setting. Using partially observed data from an existing cohort study (N=155), the authors will test whether patients with greater experience of childhood trauma in turn exhibit a larger mood boost and express greater subjective pleasure following opioid administration. Although not a randomised experimental design, this study provides the opportunity to examine the relationship between opioid response and history of childhood adversity in a naturalistic setting, and thus has the potential to either support or cast doubt on the theory that adversity elevates risk of opioid addiction by altering sensitivity to subjectively pleasurable effects.
 
Following three rounds of in-depth review, 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/7ymts
 
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. 
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
References
 
1. Carlyle M., Broomby R., Simpson G., Hannon R., Fawaz L., Mollaahmetoglu O.M., Drain, J., Mostazir, M., & Morgan C. (2021). A randomised, double‐blind study investigating the relationship between early childhood trauma and the rewarding effects of morphine. Addiction Biology, 26(6):e13047.
 
2. Carlyle, M., Kvande, M., Leknes, S., Meier, I., Buen, K., Jensen, E. N., Ernst, G. & Eikemo, M. (2022). Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgery, in principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/7ymts
Does childhood adversity alter opioid drug reward? A conceptual replication in outpatients before surgeryMolly Carlyle*, Malin Kvande*, Siri Leknes, Isabell Meier, Kaja Buen, Eira Nordeng Jensen, Gernot Ernst, Marie Eikemo. *denotes equal contribution. <p>PCI-RR Snapshot only</p>Life Sciences, Medical Sciences, Social sciencesChris Chambers2022-03-15 10:07:29 View
20 Apr 2023
STAGE 1
toto

The relationship of memory consolidation with task incorporations into dreams – A registered report

Are dreams important for memory consolidation?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by 1 anonymous reviewer
Sleep is known to be crucial for human memory, but what about dreams? Previous research has shown that the content of dreams can be manipulated by specific stimuli or tasks prior to sleep, but whether incorporating tasks into dreams influences memory consolidation is less clear. Some studies have shown an association between incorporating memory tasks into dreams and later memory performance, while others show either no effect or weaker effects. Potential reasons for this variation include the targeting of different stages of sleep – including rapid eye moment (REM) and non-REM stages (NREM) – small sample sizes, and the fact that many previous studies do not employ declarative memory tasks, which have been found to benefit more from sleep compared with tasks that target procedural memory.
 
In the current study. Schoch et al. (2023) ask whether dreams are an epiphenomenon of sleep-dependent memory processing or, instead, whether they play a key role in memory consolidation – and if so, whether that role differs for subjective experiences during NREM and REM sleep stages. Using a declarative memory task, a serial awakening paradigm (in which participants are woken and tested during NREM or REM stages), and targeted memory reactivation (TMR), the authors will test two main hypotheses: that incorporating picture categories of a declarative memory task leads to immediate (next morning) and sustained (4 days later) improvement in memory performance (especially for NREM dreams); and second, whether TMR influences the reported content of dreams. The authors also build in a range of control analyses to confirm that the task was incorporated successfully into dreams and that TMR benefited memory performance.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review, initially at Nature Communications before being transferred to PCI RR for further evaluation (see review history below for details). 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/7dwjz
 
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. Schoch, S. F., Ataei, S., Salvesen, L., Schredl, M., Windt, J., Bernadi, G., Rasch, B., Axmacher, N., & Desler, M. (2023). The relationship of memory consolidation with task incorporations into dreams – A registered report, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/7dwjz
The relationship of memory consolidation with task incorporations into dreams – A registered reportSarah F. Schoch, Somayeh Ataei, Leila Salvesen, Michael Schredl, Jennifer Windt, Giulio Bernardi, Björn Rasch, Nikolai Axmacher, and Martin Dresler<p>Sleep is crucial for memory consolidation, but whether dreams play an essential role in memory consolidation is still unknown. This research will examine if incorporating a memory task into dreams benefits memory strength in a sleep-stage-depen...Social sciencesChris Chambers2022-03-23 13:49:52 View
08 Sep 2022
STAGE 1
article picture

How to succeed in human modified environments

The role of behavioural flexibility in promoting resilience to human environmental impacts

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Gloriana Chaverri, Vedrana Šlipogor and Alizée Vernouillet
Understanding and mitigating the environmental effects of human expansion is crucial for ensuring long-term biosustainability. Recent research indicates a steep increase in urbanisation – including the expansion of cities – with global urban extent expanding by nearly 10,000 km^2 per year between 1985 and 2015 (Liu et al, 2020). The consequences of these human modified environments on animal life are significant: in order to succeed, species must adapt quickly to environmental changes, and those populations that demonstrate greater behavioural flexibility are likely to cope more effectively. These observations have, in turn, prompted the question of whether enhancing behavioural flexibility in animal species might increase their resilience to human impacts.
 
In the current research, Logan et al. (2022) will use a serial reversal learning paradigm to firstly understand how behavioural flexibility relates to success in avian species that are already successful in human modified environments. The authors will then deploy these flexibility interventions in more vulnerable species to establish whether behavioural training can improve success, as measured by outcomes such as foraging breadth, dispersal dynamics, and survival rate.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was submitted via the programmatic track and will eventually produce three Stage 2 outputs focusing on different species (toutouwai, grackles, and jays). Following two rounds of in-depth review, 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/346af
 
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. Liu, X., Huang, Y., Xu, X., Li, X., Li, X., Ciais, P., Lin, P., Gong, K., Ziegler, A. D., Chen, A., et al. (2020). High-spatiotemporal-resolution mapping of global urban change from 1985 to 2015. Nature Sustainability, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0521-x
 
2. Logan, C.J., Shaw, R., Lukas, D. & McCune, K.B. (2022). How to succeed in human modified environments, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/346af
How to succeed in human modified environmentsLogan CJ, Shaw R, Lukas D, McCune KB<p>Human modifications of environments are increasing, causing global changes that other species must adjust to or suffer from. Behavioral flexibility (hereafter ‘flexibility’) could be key to coping with rapid change. Behavioral research can cont...Life SciencesChris Chambers2022-05-06 12:12:05 View
22 Nov 2022
STAGE 1
toto

Estimating the Effect of Reward on Sleep-Dependent Memory Consolidation – A Registered Report

How does reward influence the effect of sleep on memory?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by 2 anonymous reviewers
Sleep and reward each have an important role in human memory. According to the active system consolidation hypothesis, memory consolidation during sleep originates from the repeated reactivation of memory representations that were encoded during wake (Rasch & Born, 2013). Research has also consistently shown that memory performance is enhanced for items or stimuli associated with higher vs. lower rewards. While these lines of evidence are relatively clear, the role of sleep in shaping the interaction between reward and memory is more opaque, likely due to a combination of methodological variation between studies but also due to the field’s reliance on small-N designs and biased reporting practices. Clarifying this three-way relationship, and setting field benchmarks for effect sizes, is crucial not only for building richer neurocognitive models of memory, but for clinical applications such as targeted sleep interventions to treat addiction and other forms of mental illness. 
 
Using a large, stratified online German sample (N=1750), Morgan et al. (2022) will study the three-way relationship between sleep, reward and memory by asking whether, and if so how, reward influences the magnitude of sleep-dependent memory consolidation. Using an AM:PM-PM:AM design in combination with a motivated learning task, the authors will address three main questions: first, whether sleep yields greater memory performance compared to an equivalent period of wake; second whether information associated with higher reward leads to greater memory performance compared to lower reward; and third, the crucial interaction of whether sleep causes greater recognition memory performance for higher vs. lower reward items. The design also includes a series of rigorous positive controls to confirm testability of the hypotheses, while measuring a host of additional moderating variables for exploratory analyses (including age, education status, mental health, and more).
 
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/q5pk8
 
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. Rasch, B. & Born, J. (2013). About Sleep's Role in Memory. Physiological Revews, 93, 681–766. https://doi.org/10.1152%2Fphysrev.00032.2012
 
2. Morgan, D. P., Nagel, J., Cagatay Gürsoy, N., Kern, S. & Feld, G. B. (2022). Estimating the effect of reward on sleep-dependent memory consolidation – A Registered Report, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/q5pk8
Estimating the Effect of Reward on Sleep-Dependent Memory Consolidation – A Registered ReportDavid P. Morgan, Juliane Nagel, N. Cagatay Gürsoy, Simon Kern & Gordon B. Feld<p>Rewards play an important role in guiding which memories are formed. Dopamine has been shown to be an important neuromodulator mediating the effect of rewards on memory. In rodents dopaminergic activity during learning has been shown to enhance...Life Sciences, Social sciencesChris Chambers2022-05-16 10:12:18 View
06 Jul 2022
STAGE 2
(Go to stage 1)
toto

Ontological Diversity in Gaming Disorder Measurement: A Nationally Representative Registered Report

Different ontologies, different constructs? Instruments for gaming-related health problems identify different groups of people and measure different problems

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Daniel Dunleavy and David Ellis
Screening instruments that aim to provide diagnostic classifications of gaming-related health problems derive from different ontologies and it is not known whether they identify equivalent prevalence rates of ‘gaming disorder’ or even the same individuals. Underpinned by this, Karhulahti et al. (2022) assessed how screening instruments that derive from different ontologies differ in identifying associated problem groups. A nationally representative sample of 8217 Finnish participants completed four screening measures to assess the degree of overlap between identified prevalence (how many?), who they identify (what characteristics?) and the health of their identified groups (how healthy?).
 
The results indicate that measures based on the ICD-11, DSM-5, DSM-IV, and self-assessment appear to be associated with lower mental health. However, these measures of gaming-related health problems differed significantly in terms of prevalence and/or overlap, suggesting that they identify different groups of people and that different problems or constructs are being measured by different instruments. These findings are important because they contribute to the rapidly growing literature on the ‘fuzziness’ of  constructs and measures relating to technology use. The authors recommend that researchers working with these measures should: (a) define their construct of interest; and (b) evaluate the construct validity of their instruments. Being able to answer these questions will enhance research quality and contribute to strengthened meta-analyses. Importantly, this will prevent hype around gaming-related disorders, allowing researchers to communicate clearly and appropriately without risk of confusing related yet different constructs.
 
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated by two of the reviewers who assessed it at Stage 1. Following revision, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria and awarded a  positive recommendation. To ensure that the manuscript met the requirements of the PCI RR TOP guidelines, prior to this acceptance an email communication was sent to the authors by the recommender to ensure that study data were openly available on a temporary OSF link before the final data archive is full validated by the Finnish Social Sciences Data Archive (FSD). This is noted in the recommended preprint.
 
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/usj5b
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that was used to answer the research question existed prior to Stage 1 in-principle acceptance.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
 
 
References
 
1. Karhulahti V.-M., Vahlo J., Martončik M., Munukka M., Koskimaa R. and Bonsdorff M. (2022). Ontological Diversity in Gaming Disorder Measurement: A Nationally Representative Registered Report. Peer-reviewed and recommended at Stage 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports https://psyarxiv.com/qytrs
Ontological Diversity in Gaming Disorder Measurement: A Nationally Representative Registered ReportVeli-Matti Karhulahti, Jukka Vahlo, Marcel Martončik, Matti Munukka, Raine Koskimaa, Mikaela von Bonsdorff<p>Gaming-related health problems have been researched since the 1980s with numerous different “ontologies” as reference systems, from self-assessed “game addiction” to “pathological gambling” (in the DSM-IV), “internet gaming disorder” (in the 3r...Medical Sciences, Social sciencesCharlotte Pennington2022-05-23 16:14:04 View
17 Jan 2023
STAGE 1
toto

How long does it take to form a habit?: A Multi-Centre Replication

How much practice is needed before daily actions are performed in a way that feels habitual?

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Benjamin Gardner, Wendy Wood and Adam Takacs
Even small changes in daily life can have a significant impact on one’s health, for example going to the gym at regular times and eating a healthy breakfast. But how long must we do something before it becomes a habit? Lally et al. (2010) tracked the subjective automaticity of a novel, daily (eating or exercise-related) routine. Based on 39 participants, they found a median time of 66 days. This estimate has never been replicated with their exact procedure, so the question remains of how well this holds up. Yet the estimate is useful for knowing how long we have to effortfully make ourselves perform an action until we will do it automatically.
 
In the current study, de Wit et al. (2023) propose a four-centre near-exact replication of Lally et al. (2010), for which they aim to test 800 subjects to provide a precise estimate of the time it takes to form a habit.
 
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over four rounds of 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/bj9r2
 
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
 
1. Lally, P., van Jaarsveld, C. H. M., Potts, H. W. W., & Wardle, J. (2010). How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 998–1009. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.674
 
2. de Wit, S., Bieleke, M., Fletcher, P. C., Horstmann, A., Schüler, J., Brinkhof, L. P., Gunschera, L. J., AND Murre, J. M. J. (2023). How long does it take to form a habit?: A Multi-Centre Replication, in principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/bj9r2
How long does it take to form a habit?: A Multi-Centre Replicationde Wit, S., Bieleke, M., Fletcher, P.C., Horstmann, A., Schüler, J., Brinkhof, L.P., Gunschera, L.J., Murre, J.M.J.<p>How long does it take to form a habit? This question will be addressed by an innovative study by Lally et al. (2010), in which they tracked the subjective automaticity of a novel, daily (eating or exercise-related) routine, using the Self-Repor...Social sciencesZoltan Dienes2022-05-26 09:54:26 View
21 Oct 2022
STAGE 1
toto

Replicating the facilitatory effects of transcranial random noise stimulation on motion processing: A registered report

Testing the facilitatory effect of high-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation through enhancement of global motion processing

Recommended by ORCID_LOGO based on reviews by Sam Westwood and Filippo Ghin
High frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (hf-tRNS) is a relatively novel 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 would be of value to the field. This Registered Report will target the human middle temporal complex (hMT+), an area with a well-established critical role in global motion processing. The protocol is adapted from a study by Ghin and colleagues (2018) but focusing on a sub-set of the original experimental conditions and using a fully within-subjects design (n=42). Global motion processing will be operationalised in terms of the coherence threshold for identification of the dominant direction of random-dot motion. The experiment will test the predicted facilitation of contralateral motion processing (reduced coherence threshold) during hf-tRNS to the left hMT+. The specificity of this effect will be 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, this study will provide important information about the replicability and specificity of the facilitatory effects of hf-tRNS.
 
Following two rounds of in-depth review, 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/bce7u
 
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. 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. Caroll, M. B., Edwards, G. & Baker, C. I. (2022). Replicating the facilitatory effects of transcranial random noise stimulation on motion processing: A registered report, in principle acceptance of Version 7 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/bce7u
Replicating the facilitatory effects of transcranial random noise stimulation on motion processing: A registered reportMica B. Carroll*, Grace Edwards*, Chris I. Baker<p>Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques have the potential to demonstrate the causal impact of targeted brain regions on specific behaviors, and to regulate or facilitate behavior in clinical applications. Transcranial random noise sti...Life SciencesRobert McIntosh2022-06-02 21:25:02 View