Please note that we will be CLOSED to ALL SUBMISSIONS from 1 December 2024 through 12 January 2025 to give our recommenders and reviewers a holiday break.
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 recommendations
| Id | Title * ▲ | Authors * | Abstract * | Picture | Thematic fields * | Recommender | Reviewers | Submission date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Evaluating the Pedagogical Effectiveness of Study Preregistration in the Undergraduate DissertationIncorporating open research practices into the undergraduate curriculum increases understanding of such practicesRecommended by Corina Logan based on reviews by Kelsey McCune, Neil Lewis, Jr., Lisa Spitzer and 1 anonymous reviewer
In a time when open research practices are becoming more widely used to combat questionable research practices (QRPs) in academia, this Registered Report by Pownall and colleagues (2023) empirically investigated the practice of preregistering study plans, which allows us to better understand to what degree such practices increase awareness of QRPs and whether experience with preregistration helps reduce engagement in QRPs. This investigation is timely because results from these kinds of studies are only recently becoming available and the conclusions are providing evidence that open research practices can improve research quality and reliability (e.g., Soderberg et al. 2021, Chambers & Tzavella 2022). The authors crucially focused on the effect of preregistering the undergraduate senior thesis (of psychology students in the UK), which is a key stage in the development of an academic.
Pownall and colleagues found that preregistration did not affect attitudes toward QRPs, but it did improve student understanding of open research practices. Using exploratory analyses, they additionally found that those who preregistered were those students who reported that they had more opportunity, motivation, and greater capability. This shows how important it is to incorporate the teaching of open research practices such that students can increase their capability, motivation, and opportunity to pursue such practices, whether it is preregistration or other practices that are better known to reduce QRPs (such as registered reports; Krypotos et al. 2022).
After four rounds of review and revisions, 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/9hjbw
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. Chambers C. D. & Tzavella, L. (2022). The past, present, and future of Registered Reports. Nature Human Behaviour, 6, 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01193-7
2. Krypotos, A. M., Mertens, G., Klugkist, I., & Engelhard, I. M. (2022). Preregistration: Definition, advantages, disadvantages, and how it can help against questionable research practices. In Avoiding Questionable Research Practices in Applied Psychology (pp. 343-357). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
3. Pownall, M., Pennington, C. R., Norris, E., Juanchich, M., Smaile, D., Russell, S., Gooch, D., Rhys Evans, T., Persson, S., Mak, M. H. C., Tzavella, L., Monk, R., Gough, T., Benwell, C. S. Y., Elsherif, M., Farran, E., Gallagher-Mitchell, T., Kendrick, L. T., Bahnmueller, J., Nordmann, E., Zaneva, M., Gilligan-Lee, K., Bazhydai, M., Jones, A., Sedgmond, J., Holzleitner, I., Reynolds, J., Moss, J., Farrelly, D., Parker, A. J. & Clark, K. (2023). Evaluating the pedagogical effectiveness of study preregistration in the undergraduate dissertation [Stage 2 Registered Report], acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://psyarxiv.com/xg2ah
4. Soderberg C. K., Errington T. M., Schiavone S. R., Bottesini J., Thorn F. S., Vazire S., Esterling K. M. & Nosek B. A. (2021) Initial evidence of research quality of registered reports compared with the standard publishing model. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 990–997. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01142-4
| Evaluating the Pedagogical Effectiveness of Study Preregistration in the Undergraduate Dissertation | Madeleine Pownall, Charlotte R. Pennington, Emma Norris, Marie Juanchich, David Smaile, Sophie Russell, Debbie Gooch, Thomas Rhys Evans, Sofia Persson, Matthew HC Mak, Loukia Tzavella, Rebecca Monk, Thomas Gough, Christopher SY Benwell, Mahmoud El... | <p>Research shows that questionable research practices (QRPs) are present in undergraduate final-year dissertation projects. One entry-level Open Science practice proposed to mitigate QRPs is ‘study preregistration’, through which researchers outl... | Life Sciences, Social sciences | Corina Logan | 2023-03-25 11:38:54 | |||
29 Sep 2021
STAGE 1
Evaluating the pedagogical effectiveness of study preregistration in the undergraduate dissertation: A Registered ReportDoes incorporating open research practices into the undergraduate curriculum decrease questionable research practices?Recommended by Corina Logan and Chris Chambers based on reviews by Kelsey McCune, Neil Lewis, Jr., Lisa Spitzer and 1 anonymous reviewer
In a time when open research practices are becoming more widely used to combat questionable research practices (QRPs) in academia, this Stage 1 Registered Report by Pownall and colleagues (2021) will empirically investigate the practice of preregistering study plans, which will allow us to better understand to what degree such practices increase awareness of QRPs and whether experience with preregistration helps reduce engagement in QRPs. This investigation is timely because results from these kinds of studies are only recently becoming available and the conclusions are providing evidence that open research practices can improve research quality and reliability (e.g., Soderberg et al. 2020, Chambers & Tzavella 2021). The authors crucially focus on the effect of preregistering the undergraduate senior thesis (of psychology students in the UK), which is a key stage in the development of an academic. This data will help shape the future of how we should teach open research practices and what effect we as teachers can have on budding research careers. The five expert peer reviews were of an extremely high quality and were very thorough. The authors did an excellent job of addressing all of the comments in their responses and revised manuscript versions, which resulted in only one round of peer review, plus a second revision based on Recommender feedback. As such, this registered report meets the Stage 1 criteria and is therefore awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA). We wish the authors the best of luck with the study and we look forward to seeing the results. URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/9hjbw 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
| Evaluating the pedagogical effectiveness of study preregistration in the undergraduate dissertation: A Registered Report | Madeleine Pownall; Charlotte R. Pennington; Emma Norris; Kait Clark | <p style="text-align: justify;">Research shows that questionable research practices (QRPs) are present in undergraduate final-year dissertation projects. One entry-level Open Science practice proposed to mitigate QRPs is ‘study preregistration’, t... | Life Sciences, Social sciences | Corina Logan | 2021-07-08 15:27:24 | |||
08 Sep 2023
STAGE 1
Evaluation of spatial learning and wayfinding in a complex maze using immersive virtual reality. A registered reportEvaluation of an immersive virtual reality wayfinding taskRecommended by Robert McIntosh based on reviews by Conor Thornberry, Gavin Buckingham and 1 anonymous reviewer
The Virtual Maze Task (VMT) is a digital desktop 2D spatial learning task that has been used for research into the effect of sleep and dreaming on memory consolidation (e.g. Wamsley et al, 2010). One limitation of this task has been low rates of reported dream incorporation. Eudave and colleagues (2023) have created an immersive virtual reality (iVR) version of the VMT, which they believe might be more likely to be incorporated into dreams. As an initial step in validating this task for research, they propose a within-subjects study to compare three measures of spatial learning between the 2D desktop and iVR versions. Based on a review of relevant literature, the prediction is that performance will be similar between the two task versions. The planned sample size (n = 62) is sufficient for a .9 power test of equivalence within effect size bounds of d = -.47 to .47. Additional independent variables (gender, perspective-taking ability) and dependent measures (self-reported cybersickness and sense of presence) will be recorded for exploratory analyses.
The study plan was refined across four rounds of review, with input from two external reviewers and the recommender, after which it was judged to satisfy the Stage 1 criteria for in-principle acceptance (IPA).†
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/wba2v
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
Eudave, L., Martínez, M., Valencia, M., & Roth D. (2023). Evaluation of spatial learning and wayfinding in a complex maze using immersive virtual reality. A registered report. In principle acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports.
Wamsley, E. J., Tucker, M., Payne, J. D., Benavides, J. A., & Stickgold, R. (2010). Dreaming of a learning task is associated with enhanced sleep-dependent memory consolidation. Current Biology, 20, 850–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2010.03.027
† There is one minor change that the authors should make to the Methods section, which is sufficiently small that it can be incorporated at Stage 2: "if both tests reject the null hypothesis (observed data is less/greater than the lower/upper equivalence bounds), conditions are considered statistically equivalent" >> suggest changing "less/greater" to "greater/lesser" for correct correspondence with "lower/upper".
| Evaluation of spatial learning and wayfinding in a complex maze using immersive virtual reality. A registered report | Eudave L., Martínez M., Valencia M., Roth D. | <p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Objectives</strong>: Mazes have traditionally been used as tools for evaluating spatial learning and navigational abilities in humans. They have been also utilized in sleep and dream research, as wayfinding ... | Life Sciences | Robert McIntosh | 2023-03-31 17:21:20 | |||
30 Sep 2024
STAGE 1
Examining the role of action interpretation in changes in choice induced by go/no-go and approach/avoidance responsesDoes interpretation of actions as either avoid or inhibit influence choice behaviour for candy?Recommended by Andrew Jones based on reviews by Alexander MacLellan and Katrijn HoubenExperimental research demonstrates that executing or inhibiting motor responses (or approaching / avoiding) towards a stimulus can alter the valuation of the stimulus (Yang et al., 2022). There are competing theories as to the proposed mechanisms of value change, such as increased response conflict or prediction errors (Houben & Aulbach, 2023). However, research has mostly examined response execution/inhibition and approach/avoidance in isolation and the few studies that have examined these together have focused on stimulus evaluation as an outcome.
In the present study, Chen et al. (2024) will use a novel version of a combined go/no-go / approach avoidance paradigm to test the effects on choice of consumable candy. In this task, participants are randomly assigned to make a response framed as a go / no-go action or an approach / avoidance action to control a shopping cart (Chen & Van Dessel, 2024). Following this they will complete a food choice task in which participants make a series of binary choices for different candies. Their performance on this task will lead to the receipt of real-world candy. The authors aim to test whether the same responses will lead to different effects on food choice, depending on how the response was interpreted (e.g. participants in the approach/avoidance instruction group will select Approach items more often than those in the go/no-go instruction group). The study is well powered to detect the proposed effect size of interest, and data will be analysed using Bayesian mixed-effect models. This study will shed light onto theoretical predictions of action interpretation on stimulus value and choice, which may improve the efficacy of behaviour change tools such as approach bias training in future. The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the recommender and 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/bn5xa (under temporary private embargo)
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. Chen, Z. and Van Dessel, P. (2024). Action interpretation determines the effects of go/no-go and approach/avoidance actions on stimulus evaluation. Open Mind, 8, 898-923. https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00151 2. Chen, Z., Van Dessel, P., and Figner, B. (2024). Examining the role of action interpretation in changes in choice induced by go/no-go and approach/avoidance responses. In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/bn5xa
3. Houben, K. and Aulbach, M. (2023). Is there a difference between stopping and avoiding? A review of the mechanisms underlying Go/No-Go and Approach-Avoidance training for food choice. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 49, 101245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2022.101245 4. Yang, Y., Qi, L., Morys, F., Wu, Q. and Chen, H. (2022). Food-Specific Inhibition Training for Food Devaluation: A Meta-Analysis. Nutrients, 14, 1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14071363 | Examining the role of action interpretation in changes in choice induced by go/no-go and approach/avoidance responses | Zhang Chen, Pieter Van Dessel, Bernd Figner | <p>Executing go/no-go (GNG) and approach/avoidance (AAT) responses toward objects can increase people’s choices for go over no-go items, and for approach over avoidance items. Some theoretical accounts explain these effects as the results of merel... | Social sciences | Andrew Jones | Alexander MacLellan, Katrijn Houben | 2024-06-17 17:57:07 | ||
02 Jun 2022
STAGE 1
Exploring How Members of Illicit Networks Navigate Investigative InterviewsWhat to say to help one's partners in crimeRecommended by Zoltan Dienes based on reviews by Tom Ormerod and Lorraine Hope
When interviewing members of a criminal network, what determines what information a given interviewee chooses to disclose, as guided by the network's collective planning? What principles could help inform a detective preparing for such interviews? In the current study, Neequaye et al. will recruit groups of people known to each other to assume the role of networks that run an illegal sports betting business, fronting as a chain of tanning salons. Although each network launders money, they have to come up with a strategy to convince investigators they are legit. The groups are motivated to disclose some information when individuals are interviewed, but only enough to appear cooperative. The relation of the amount of different sorts of information disclosed depending on estimated risks and benefits for the group will be tested.
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review by two expert reviewers. 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/n7ugr
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. Data collection began during the final round of Stage 1 peer review. Since no further revisions were made after this review round, 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. Neequaye, D. A., Granhag, P. A. & Luke, T. J. (2022). Exploring How Members of Illicit Networks Navigate Investigative Interviews, in principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/n7ugr | Exploring How Members of Illicit Networks Navigate Investigative Interviews | David A. Neequaye, Pär Anders Granhag, Timothy J. Luke, Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg. | <p>This study will explore how members of an illicit network navigate investigative interviews probing their crimes. We will examine how perceived disclosure outcomes, namely, the projected costs and benefits, affect what members choose to reveal.... | Social sciences | Zoltan Dienes | Tom Ormerod, Lorraine Hope | 2021-12-20 10:03:41 | ||
Exploring How Members of Illicit Networks Navigate Investigative InterviewsWhat to say to help one's partners in crimeRecommended by Zoltan Dienes based on reviews by Lorraine Hope
When interviewing members of a criminal network, what determines the information a given interviewee chooses to disclose, as guided by the network's collective planning? What principles could help inform a detective preparing for such interviews? In the current study, Neequaye et al. recruited groups of people known to each other to assume the role of networks that run an illegal sports betting business, fronting as a chain of tanning salons. Although each network launders money, they have to come up with a strategy to convince investigators they are legit. The groups are motivated to disclose some information when individuals are interviewed, but only enough to appear cooperative. Members disclosed information they perceived would yield benefical outcomes, but the extent to which members disclosed varied substantially according to the groups they were in.
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/n7ugr
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. Data collection began during the final round of Stage 1 peer review. Since no further revisions were made after this review round, the risk of bias due to prior data observation remained zero, and the manuscript therefore qualified for Level 6. List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:
References
1. Neequaye, D. A., Granhag, P. A. & Luke, T. J. (2023). Exploring How Members of Illicit Networks Navigate Investigative Interviews. Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/f3ct4 | Exploring How Members of Illicit Networks Navigate Investigative Interviews | David A. Neequaye, Pär Anders Granhag, Timothy Luke | <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 recr... | Humanities, Social sciences | Zoltan Dienes | 2022-07-11 15:21:09 | |||
11 Jul 2023
STAGE 1
Factors impacting effective altruism: Revisiting heuristics and biases in charity in a replication and extensions of Baron and Szymanska (2011)Understanding biases and heuristics in charity donationsRecommended by Romain Espinosa based on reviews by Amanda Geiser and Jonathan Berman ?
Decisions to give to charities are affected by numerous external and internal factors. Understanding the elements that influence donation decisions is of first-order importance for science and society. On the scientific side, understanding the determinants of charity giving contributes to the knowledge of altruistic behaviors in the presence of collective problems such as poverty, climate change, or animal welfare. On the social side, pointing out which factors affect donations can help increase pro-social behaviors and might facilitate collective actions in the case of public goods.
Previous work identified multiple mechanisms affecting altruistic donations to charities (Bekkers and Weeping, 2011). Importantly, Baron and Szymanska (2011) collected empirical evidence suggesting that people prefer (i) their donations to be directly used for projects rather than organizational costs, (ii) when charities have low past costs, (iii) to diversity their donations into several NGOs, (iv) to favor charities that deal with close peers like nationals, and (v) to give voluntarily rather than through taxes.
In the current study, Chan and Feldman seek to replicate the results of Baron and Szymanska (2011). They propose a close replication of the original study using a large sample of online participants (1,400 participants). In addition to the five mechanisms identified by the original study, they will further explore whether public donation increases contributions and whether individuals are more likely to donate when the charities’ overhead costs are paid for by other donors.
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/gmswz
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. Baron, J. & Szymanska, E. (2011). Heuristics and Biases in Charity. In D. M. Oppenheimer & C. Y. Olivola (Eds.), The Science of Giving: Experimental Approaches to the Study of Charity (pp. 215–235). Psychology Press.
2. Bekkers, R. & Wiepking, P. (2011). A Literature Review of Empirical Studies of Philanthropy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 924–973.
3. Chan, M. & Feldman, G. (2023). Factors impacting effective altruism: Revisiting heuristics and biases in charity in a replication and extensions Registered Report of Baron and Szymanska (2011), in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/gmswz
| Factors impacting effective altruism: Revisiting heuristics and biases in charity in a replication and extensions of Baron and Szymanska (2011) | Mannix CHAN, Gilad FELDMAN | <p>This is a scheduled PCI-RR snap shot for a planned project: "Factors impacting effective altruism: Revisiting heuristics and biases in charity in a replication and extensions of Baron and Szymanska (2011)"</p> | Social sciences | Romain Espinosa | 2023-02-28 13:19:52 | |||
Factors impacting effective altruism: Revisiting heuristics and biases in charity in a replication and extensions Registered Report of Baron and Szymanska (2011)Understanding biases and heuristics in charity donationsRecommended by Romain Espinosa based on reviews by Amanda Geiser and Jonathan Berman
Decisions to give to charities are affected by numerous external and internal factors. Understanding the elements influencing donation decisions is of first-order importance for science and society. On the scientific side, understanding the determinants of charity-giving contributes to the knowledge of altruistic behaviors in the presence of collective problems such as poverty, climate change, or animal welfare. On the social side, pointing out which factors affect donations can help increase prosocial behaviors and might facilitate collective actions in the case of public goods. Previous work has identified multiple mechanisms affecting altruistic donations to charities (Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011). Importantly, Baron and Szymanska (2011) collected empirical evidence suggesting that people prefer (i) their donations to be directly used for projects rather than organizational costs, (ii) when charities have low past costs, (iii) to diversity their donations into several NGOs, (iv) to favor charities that deal with close peers like nationals, and (v) to give voluntarily rather than through taxes. Here, Chan and Feldman (2024) conducted a close replication of Studies 1 to 4 of Baron and Szymanska (2011) using a large sample of online participants (four studies, overall N=1,403). In their replication, the authors found supporting evidence for the phenomena reported in the original study. In particular, people were more likely to donate to charities with lower organizational and lower past costs, to diversify their donations, and to show ingroup/nationalist preferences with larger donations to NGOs helping local over foreign children. Chan and Feldman (2024) ran additional analyses that indicated validity concerns regarding the analysis and questions that resulted in finding a preference for voluntary donations over taxation. In their added extensions that went beyond the original study, they also found that donors preferred to donate to charities whose overhead costs are paid for by other donors and unexpected evidence that making donations anonymous increased rather than decreased contributions. The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over one round of in-depth review by the recommender and two expert reviewers. Following revision, 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/gmswz
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. Baron, J. and Szymanska, E. (2011). Heuristics and Biases in Charity. In D. M. Oppenheimer and C. Y. Olivola (Eds.), The Science of Giving: Experimental Approaches to the Study of Charity (pp. 215–235). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203865972
2. Bekkers, R. and Wiepking, P. (2011). A Literature Review of Empirical Studies of Philanthropy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 924–973. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764010380927
3. Chan, M. and Feldman, G. (2024). Factors impacting effective altruism: Revisiting heuristics and biases in charity in a replication and extensions Registered Report of Baron and Szymanska (2011) [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/4etkp
| Factors impacting effective altruism: Revisiting heuristics and biases in charity in a replication and extensions Registered Report of Baron and Szymanska (2011) | Mannix Chan, Gilad Feldman | <p>Individuals who donate to charity may be affected by various biases and donate inefficiently. In a replication and extension Registered Report with a US Amazon Mechanical Turk sample using CloudResearch (N = 1403), we replicated Studies 1 to 4 ... | Social sciences | Romain Espinosa | 2024-04-27 02:28:49 | |||
18 Nov 2022
STAGE 1
Fathers learning on the job: Role of Paternity Leave Duration on Paternal Infant-Directed Speech and Preference for Male Infant-Directed Speech in infantsDads and baby talk: understanding the role of paternal interaction in infant-directed speechRecommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Naja Ferjan Ramírez, Melanie Soderstrom and Krista Byers-Heinlein
Infant-directed speech (IDS) – colloquially known as “baby talk” – is a form of speech produced by parents that may be important for emotional bonding with children while also helping infants with early language development. In contrast to adult-directed speech (ADS), IDS is characterised by a higher and broader pitch range, slower speech rate, and shorter/simpler syntax. A significant body of research has studied the dynamics of IDS and shown that infants prefer IDS over ADS, however the great majority of this work has focused on maternal speech, leaving much to be discovered about the differences and similarities between paternal and maternal IDS, the relative preference infants exhibit for paternal IDS compared with ADS, and the role of paternal interaction in shaping these dynamics.
Using a Norwegian sample of 70 fathers and children, the proposed study by Robberstad et al. (2022) takes an important step into this less-explored domain, asking whether (and if so, how) fathers employ IDS when interacting with infants, whether any such modulation of speech is related to the amount of time they spend as a caregiver, whether infants show the same preferences for IDS over ADS in fathers as observed previously in mothers, and whether that preference is related to the amount of exposure the infant has to parental speech. The authors will analyse speech modulation using acoustic analysis, while preference for IDS will be tested using eye-tracking to measure infants’ overt gaze orientation while listening to IDS vs ADS.
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/c43xu
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. Robberstad, S., Kartushina, N. & Mayor, J. (2022). Fathers learning on the job: Role of paternity leave duration on paternal infant-directed speech and preference for male infant-directed speech in infants, in principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/sjupt
| Fathers learning on the job: Role of Paternity Leave Duration on Paternal Infant-Directed Speech and Preference for Male Infant-Directed Speech in infants | Silje Robberstad, Natalia Kartushina & Julien Mayor | <p>The acoustic properties of infant-directed speech (IDS) and the functions that IDS may serve in language development have been highly debated in research. However, previous research has mostly explored IDS in mothers and the preference for mate... | Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2022-06-27 20:53:13 | |||
11 Sep 2023
STAGE 1
Finding the right words to evaluate research: An empirical appraisal of eLife’s assessment vocabularyUnderstanding the validity of standardised language in research evaluationRecommended by Sarahanne Miranda Field and Chris Chambers based on reviews by Chris Hartgerink (they/them), Veli-Matti Karhulahti, Štěpán Bahník and Ross Mounce
In 2023, the journal eLife ended the practice of making binary accept/reject decisions following peer review, instead sharing peer review reports (for manuscripts that are peer-reviewed) and brief “eLife assessments” representing the consensus opinions of editors and peer reviewers. As part of these assessments, the journal draws language from a "common vocabulary" to linguistically rank the significance of findings and strength of empirical support for the article's conclusions. In particular, the significance of findings is described using an ordinal scale of terms from "landmark" → "fundamental" → "important" → "valuable" → "useful", while the strength of support is ranked across six descending levels from "exceptional" down to "inadequate".
In the current study, Hardwicke et al. (2023) question the validity of this taxonomy, noting a range of linguistic ambiguities and counterintuitive characteristics that may undermine the communication of research evaluations to readers. Given the centrality of this common vocabulary to the journal's policy, the authors propose a study to explore whether the language used in the eLife assessments will be interpreted as intended by readers. Using a repeated-measures experimental design, they will tackle three aims: first, to understand the extent to which people share similar interpretations of phrases used to describe scientific research; second, to reveal the extent to which people’s implicit ranking of phrases used to describe scientific research aligns with each other and with the intended ranking; and third, to test whether phrases used to describe scientific research have overlapping interpretations. The proposed study has the potential to make a useful contribution to metascience, as well as being a valuable source of information for other journals potentially interested in following the novel path made by eLife.
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/mkbtp
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. Hardwicke, T. E., Schiavone, S., Clarke, B. & Vazire, S. (2023). Finding the right words to evaluate research: An empirical appraisal of eLife’s assessment vocabulary. In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/mkbtp | Finding the right words to evaluate research: An empirical appraisal of eLife’s assessment vocabulary | Tom E. Hardwicke, Sarah Schiavone, Beth Clarke, Simine Vazire | <p>The journal eLife recently announced that it would abandon binary ‘accept/reject’ decisions and instead focus on sharing both peer review reports and short “eLife assessments” representing the consensus opinions of editors and peer reviewers. F... | Life Sciences, Social sciences | Sarahanne Miranda Field | 2023-06-16 12:11:14 |
