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 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The Effect of Brooding about Societal Problems on Conspiracy Beliefs: A Registered ReportBrooding increases conspiracy beliefs but with practical significance to be determinedRecommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Matt Williams and Daniel Toribio-Flórez
The world is seemingly awash with conspiracy theories – from well-trodden examples such as fake Moon landings, the 9/11 truth movement, and Holocaust denial, to relative newcomers including COVID as a bioweapon, QAnon, and the belief that the science of climate change has been invented or falsified. While there is a public perception that conspiracy theories are becoming more prevalent, recent evidence suggests that the rate of conspiracism is relatively stable over time (Uscinski et al., 2022). At any point in history, it seems that a certain proportion of people find themselves vulnerable to conspiracy beliefs, but what distinguishes those who do from those who don’t, and what are the causal factors?
In the current study, Liekefett et al. (2023) investigated the critical role of rumination – a perseverative and repetitive focus on negative content leading to emotional distress. In particular, the authors asked whether one component of rumination referred to as brooding (dwelling on one’s worries and distressing emotions) has a specific causal role in the formation of conspiracy beliefs. In a series of preliminary experiments, the authors first established a procedure for successfully inducing rumination, identifying various boundary conditions and requirements for a successful design. In the main study (N=1,638 to 2,007 depending on the analysis), they asked whether the induction of brooding causes a significant increase in conspiracy beliefs. Manipulation checks were also included to confirm intervention fidelity (independently of this hypothesis), and exploratory analyses tested the effect of various moderators, as well as the causal role of a complementary manipulation of reflection – a component of rumination in which attention is focused on the issue at hand rather than one’s emotions.
As expected by the authors' preliminary work, manipulation checks independently confirmed the effectiveness of the brooding intervention. In answer to the main research question, participants who brooded over the worries and negative emotions associated with an issue were more susceptible to conspiracy beliefs compared to a control group. However, while this effect of brooding was statistically significant, the confidence interval of the effect size estimate overlapped with the authors' proposed smallest effect size of interest (d = 0.20), suggesting that the practical value of the effect remains to be determined.
Overall the findings are consistent with a range of psychological theories suggesting that rumination induces negative affect and/or narrows attention to negative information, which in turn may make conspiracy theories seem more probable and render individuals more vulnerable to cognitive bias. The authors note the importance of future work to define the smallest effect of practical significance, analagous to the criteria used to determine the 'minimal clinically important difference’ in medical research.
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/y82bs
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. Uscinski, J., Enders, A., Klofstad, C., Seelig, M., Drochon, H., Premaratne, K. & Murthi, M. (2022) Have beliefs in conspiracy theories increased over time? PLOS ONE 17: e0270429. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270429
2. Liekefett, L. Sebben, S. & Becker, J. C. (2023). The Effect of Brooding about Societal Problems on Conspiracy Beliefs: A Registered Report. Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/3e8wc | The Effect of Brooding about Societal Problems on Conspiracy Beliefs: A Registered Report | Luisa Liekefett, Simone Sebben, Julia C. Becker | <p>This Stage 2 Registered Report concerns the relationship between rumination, a repetitive style of negative thinking, and conspiracy beliefs (Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/y82bs, date of in-principle-acceptance: 23/05/2023). Based on four pi... | Humanities, Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2023-10-19 17:46:59 | |||
The Medusa effect: A registered replication report of Will, Merritt, Jenkins, and Kingstone (2021)Looking (again) at Medusa: Evidence that pictorial abstraction influences mind perceptionRecommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Alan Kingstone and 1 anonymous reviewer
The Medusa effect is a recently described phenomenon in which people judge a person to be more mindful when they appear as a picture (termed L1) than as a picture within a picture (L2). Across a series of experiments, Will et al. (2021) reported that at higher levels of abstraction, images of people were judged lower in realness (how real the person seemed), experience (the ability to feel) and agency (the ability to plan and act), and also benefited less from prosocial behaviour. The findings provide an intriguing window into mind perception – the extent to which we attribute minds and mental capacities to others.
In the current study, Han et al. (2023) undertook a close replication of two experiments from the original report by Will et al. (2021), asking first, whether the level of pictorial abstraction influences ratings of realness, agency and experience, and second, whether it also influences prosocial behaviour as measured in the dictator game (with participants predicted to allocate more money to recipients presented as pictures than as pictures within pictures). In the event of a non-replication using the original materials, the authors planned to further repeat the experiments using newly generated stimuli that are better matched for cultural context and more tightly controlled along various dimensions.
Results supported all pre-registered hypotheses. Participants rated and perceived L1 stimuli as having significantly higher levels of realness, agency, and experience than L2, and they also allocated significantly more money to L1 recipients than L2 recipients in a dictator game. Furthermore, participants who judged L1 as higher than L2 on all three dimensions also differentiated significantly between L1 and L2 in the dictator game, indicating a relationship between mind perception and prosociality. Overall, the findings confirm that pictures with lower levels of abstraction are perceived as more mindful and are associated with higher levels of prosocial behavior. Consequently, the results suggest that the Medusa effect is a reproducible phenomenon.
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/xj46z 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. Will, P., Merritt, E., Jenkins, R., & Kingstone, A. (2021). The Medusa effect reveals levels of mind perception in pictures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(32), e2106640118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2106640118
2. Han, J., Zhang, M., Liu, J., Song, Y. & Yamada, Y. (2023).The Medusa effect: A registered replication report of Will, Merritt, Jenkins, and Kingstone (2021). Acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/yqnu8
| The Medusa effect: A registered replication report of Will, Merritt, Jenkins, and Kingstone (2021) | Jing Han, Minjun Zhang, Jiaxin Liu, Yu Song, Yuki Yamada | <p>Will et al.'s (2021) found the Medusa effect, which refers to the tendency that people evaluate a “person in picture” more mindful than a “person in picture of a picture”. The present study tried to directly replicate the Experiments 2 and 5 of... | Social sciences | Chris Chambers | 2023-10-24 03:42:14 | |||
28 Mar 2024
STAGE 1
Working memory performance in adverse environments: Enhanced, impaired, or intact?A closer look at working memory changing with adversityRecommended by Yuki Yamada 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 sciences | Yuki Yamada | Anonymous, Kathryn Bates | 2023-10-30 15:11:48 | ||
24 Apr 2024
STAGE 1
Synaesthesia as a Model for Assessing Individual Differences in Visual Perception and Memory PerformanceWhat can synaesthesia tell us about links between perception and memory?Recommended by Reshanne Reeder based on reviews by Janina Neufeld, David Brang and Tessa van Leeuwen
What is the relationship between perception and memory? Although these topics are typically investigated separately, there is evidence that these cognitive processes may be related: for example, individuals with synaesthesia may experience both enhancements in visual acuity and visual memory; and individuals with amnesia may also show deficits in visual perceptual processing. However, comprehensive evidence for the relationship between perception and different forms of memory (both short-term and long-term) is currently lacking.
In this Stage 1 manuscript, Whelan et al. (2024) seek to elucidate this relationship by investigating individual differences in perception and memory in a general population sample (i.e., in synaesthetes, non-synaesthetic relatives, and controls). There are two accounts that may explain enhanced perception and memory in synaesthesia: a ‘dual-coding’ account, which suggests that the extra perceptual information often experienced in synaesthesia (e.g., seeing colors for different letters of the alphabet) may contribute to encoding richer information in sensory memory; and an ‘enhanced processing’ account, which posits that enhanced perception and memory in synaesthesia may be due to genetic or environmental factors not directly related to synaesthetic experiences. In the former case, synaesthetes should perform more similarly to each other than to their non-synaesthetic relatives; in the latter case, non-synaesthetic relatives of synaesthetes should show similar perceptual and memory benefits. The current study should therefore find evidence in favor of one of these accounts over the other. In addition to this, the authors will generate multidimensional cognitive profiles of synaesthetes and their relatives, compared to non-synaethetes, including perception, memory, mental imagery and cognitive styles.
The Stage 1 submission was evaluated by the recommender and two expert reviewers. Following revisions, 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/6h8dx (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. Whelan, E., Sachdeva, C., Ovalle-Fresa, R., Rothen R., & Ward, J. (2024). Synaesthesia as a Model for Assessing Individual Differences in Visual Perception and Memory Performance. In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/6h8dx
| Synaesthesia as a Model for Assessing Individual Differences in Visual Perception and Memory Performance | Emily Whelan, Chhavi Sachdeva, Rebecca Ovalle-Fresa, Nicolas Rothen and Jamie Ward | <p>In this study, the cognitive profile of synaesthesia (a perceptual condition in which primary experiences, such as perceiving digits or words, elicit extra secondary sensations) is used as a model system to assess visual perceptual abilities an... | Social sciences | Reshanne Reeder | 2023-11-07 13:02:39 | |||
26 Feb 2024
STAGE 1
Lure of choice revisited: Replication and extensions Registered Report of Bown et al. (2003)Replicating the "lure of choice" phenomenonRecommended by Patrick Savage based on reviews by Hu Chuan-Peng and Gakuto Chiba
The "lure of choice" refers to the idea that we prefer to preserve the option to choose even when the choice is not helpful. In a classic study cited hundred of times, Bown et al. (2003) reported evidence for the lure of choice from a series of studies involving choices between competing options of night clubs, bank savings accounts, casino spinners, and the Monty Hall door choice paradigm. In all cases, participants tended to prefer to choose an option when paired with a "lure", even when that lure was objectively inferior (e.g., same probability of winning but lower payoff).
The lure of choice phenomenon applies to a variety of real-life situations many of us often face in our daily lives, and Bown et al.’s findings have influenced the way organizations present choices to prospective users. Despite their theoretical and practical impact, Bown et al.'s findings have not previously been directly replicated, even as the importance of replication studies has become increasingly acknowledged (Nosek et al., 2022).
Here, Chan & Feldman (2024) outline a close replication of Bown et al. (2003) that will replicate and extend their original design. By unifying Bown et al.'s multiple studies into a single paradigm with which they will collect data from approximately 1,000 online participants via Prolific, they will have substantially greater statistical power than the original study to detect the predicted effects. They will follow LeBel et al.’s (2019) criteria for evaluating replicability, such that it will be considered a successful replication depending on how many of the 4 scenarios show a signal in the same direction as Bown et al.’s original results (at least 3 out of 4 scenarios = successful replication; no scenarios = failed replication; 1 or 2 scenarios = mixed results replication). They have also added additional controls including a neutral baseline choice without a lure, further ensuring the the validity and interpretability of their eventual findings.
One of the goals in creating Peer Community In Registered Reports (PCI RR) was to increase the availability of publishing venues for replication studies, and so PCI RR is well-suited to the proposed replication. Feldman’s lab has also pioneered the use of PCI RR for direct replications of previous studies (e.g., Zhu & Feldman, 2023), and the current submission uses an open-access template he developed (Feldman, 2023). This experience combined with PCI RR’s efficient scheduled review model meant that the current full Stage 1 protocol was able to go from initial submission, receive detailed peer review by two experts, and receive in-principle acceptance (IPA) for the revised submission, all in less than one month.
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/8ug9m
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
Bown, N. J., Read, D. & Summers, B. (2003). The lure of choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16(4), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.447
Chan, A. N. Y. & Feldman, G. (2024). The lure of choice revisited: Replication and extensions Registered Report of Bown et al. (2003) [Stage 1]. In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community In Registered Reports. https://osf.io/8ug9m
Feldman, G. (2023). Registered Report Stage 1 manuscript template. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YQXTP
LeBel, E. P., Vanpaemel, W., Cheung, I. & Campbell, L. (2019). A brief guide to evaluate replications. Meta-Psychology, 3. https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2018.843
Nosek, B. A., Hardwicke, T. E., Moshontz, H., Allard, A., Corker, K. S., Dreber, A., ... & Vazire, S. (2022). Replicability, robustness, and reproducibility in psychological science. Annual Review of Psychology, 73(1), 719-748. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-114157
Zhu, M. & Feldman, G. (2023). Revisiting the links between numeracy and decision making: Replication Registered Report of Peters et al. (2006) with an extension examining confidence. Collabra: Psychology, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.77608
| Lure of choice revisited: Replication and extensions Registered Report of Bown et al. (2003) | Nga Yi (Angela) Chan, Gilad Feldman | <p>[IMPORTANT: Abstract, method, and results were written using a randomised 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 sciences | Patrick Savage | 2023-11-15 00:40:47 | |||
17 Jun 2024
STAGE 1
Loneliness in the Brain: Distinguishing Between Hypersensitivity and HyperalertnessA new look at loneliness by testing hyperalternessRecommended by Hedwig Eisenbarth and D. Samuel Schwarzkopf based on reviews by Marta Andreatta and 1 anonymous reviewer
Do people who are more alert towards social stimuli vary in loneliness? This report addresses the question how loneliness relates to hypersensitivity to social stimuli using an oddball paradigm. Based on preliminary results, the study plans to compare high and low lonely individuals for how they react to happy and angry facial expressions using neurophysiological correlates. Findings from the study will provide further insights in how loneliness might be related to processing of social information.
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two 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/fxngv 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. Bathelt, J., Dijk, C., & Otten, M. (2024). Loneliness in the Brain: Distinguishing Between Hypersensitivity and Hyperalertness. In principle acceptance of Version 5 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/fxngv | Loneliness in the Brain: Distinguishing Between Hypersensitivity and Hyperalertness | Joe Bathelt, Corine Dijk, Marte Otten | <p>Introduction: Loneliness has emerged as a pressing public health issue, necessitating greater understanding of its mechanisms to devise effective treatments. While the link between loneliness and biased social cognition is a commonly proposed, ... | Social sciences | Hedwig Eisenbarth | Marta Andreatta, Anonymous | 2023-11-20 16:34:04 | ||
09 Sep 2024
STAGE 1
How Effortful is Boredom? Studying Self-Control Demands Through PupillometryUnmasking the effort of boredom: A deeper look into self-control dynamicsRecommended by Thomas Meyer based on reviews by Jonas Dora, Julia Englert, Erik Bijleveld and 1 anonymous reviewer
Effective effort regulation is central for self-control and has been a focus of psychological research for many decades. It is well established that challenging cognitive tasks, which impose self-control demands due to their complexity, are perceived as more effortful and require greater physiological activation than simpler tasks. However, the experience and allocation of effort during a task, whether easy or difficult, likely depends on more than these inherent self-control demands. Another key factor is boredom, which can arise during task execution. Yet, the role of boredom and the interplay with perceived task difficulty over time remains underexamined.
Based on these considerations, Radtke et al. (2024) aim to examine how boredom and task difficulty influence both subjective and objective measures of effort. They propose that subjective cognitive effort consists of both boredom-related and difficulty-related components, hypothesizing that both factors together more accurately predict objective effort allocation than task difficulty alone. The proposed study will use a within-subject design, in which participants perform two versions of the Stroop task: an easy version with only congruent trials and a hard version. Thought probes during the task will track subjective boredom, fatigue, perceived difficulty, and effort. Phasic and stimulus-evoked pupil dilation will serve as an objective index of cognitive effort, while a subsequent flanker task will assess effects on secondary task performance.
The authors predict that the easy Stroop version will result in lower perceived difficulty but higher boredom, as well as fewer errors and faster reaction times compared to the hard version. Over time, boredom and perceived effort due to boredom are expected to increase, while perceived task difficulty and effort attributed to difficulty are anticipated to decrease. Linear Mixed Models will be employed to determine whether phasic and stimulus-evoked pupil dilation can be predicted by effort attributed to boredom, difficulty, or both. This innovative approach combines objective and subjective measures and promises to deepen our understanding of the cognitive demands posed by boredom, with significant implications for research on effort regulation and motivation.
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated by four expert reviewers in two rounds of in-depth review. Following responses from the authors, the recommender determined that Stage 1 criteria were met and awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/38qz4
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 Radtke, V., Wolff, W., & Martarelli, C. S. (2024). How effortful is boredom? Studying self-control demands through pupillometry. In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/38qz4
| How Effortful is Boredom? Studying Self-Control Demands Through Pupillometry | Vanessa C. Radtke, Wanja Wolff, Corinna S. Martarelli | <p>Self-control is essential for managing our actions, yet its exertion is perceived as effortful. Performing a task may require effort not only because of its inherent difficulty but also due to its potential for inducing boredom, as boredom has ... | Humanities, Social sciences | Thomas Meyer | 2023-11-21 17:56:13 | |||
Genetically-modified animals as models of neurodevelopmental conditions: a review of systematic review reporting qualityEvidence for mixed quality of systematic reviews in preclinical animal studies of neurodevelopmental conditionsRecommended by Chris Chambers based on reviews by Marietta Papadatou-Pastou
Single gene alterations have been estimated to account for nearly half of neurodevelopmental conditions (NDCs), providing a crucial opportunity for animal models to understand the underlying mechanisms, causes and potential treatments. The use of systematic reviews (SRs) can, in principle, provide a powerful means to synthesise this evidence-base; however, the reporting quality of previous SRs in preclinical animal research has been found lacking (Hunniford et al., 2021). In the current study, Wilson et al. (2023) will undertook a review of systematic reviews to assess the characteristics and reporting quality of SRs that, in turn, synthesise research in genetically-modified animals to model NDCs. In particular, the authors extracted key features of reviews (including, among others, the aim and primary research questions, relevant animal model, and number of studies in the SR), in addition to quality indicators such as risk of bias and completeness of reporting. In doing so, the authors aimed to enhance guidance on the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews in this area.
Of twelve publications that met the preregistered search criteria, the completeness and quality of reporting was variable. Among the better reported characteristics were search strategies (9 of 12 articles), reporting of funding sources (10 of 12 articles) and use of animal data (11 of 12 articles). In contrast, only two articles reported whether the study protocol was preregistered, only three articles reported methods for assessing risk of bias, and just one included methods to analyse publication bias. In addition, the authors identified 19 review registrations via PROSPERO, most of which remained unpublished after their anticipated end dates. Overall, the results highlight the importance of adherence to reporting guidelines for increasing the transparency and reproducibility of SRs in this field.
The Stage 2 manuscript was evaluated over one round of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses by the authors, 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/952qk Level of bias control achieved: Level 4. At least some of the data/evidence that was used to answer the research question already existed prior to IPA and was accessible in principle to the authors, but the authors certify that they did not access any part of that data/evidence prior to IPA.
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals: References
1. Hunniford V. T., Montroy J., Fergusson D. A., Avey M. T., Wever K. E., McCann S. K., Foster M., Fox G., Lafreniere M., Ghaly M., Mannell S., Godwinska K., Gentles A., Selim S., MacNeil J., Sikora L., Sena E. S., Page M. J., Macleod M., Moher D., & Lalu M. M. (2021). Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of preclinical systematic reviews. PLOS Biology, 19:e3001177. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001177
2. Wilson, E., Currie, G., Macleod, M., Kind, P. & Sena, E. S. (2023). Genetically-modified animals as models of neurodevelopmental conditions: a review of systematic review reporting quality [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/s5xd4
| Genetically-modified animals as models of neurodevelopmental conditions: a review of systematic review reporting quality | Emma Wilson, Gillian Currie, Malcolm Macleod, Peter Kind, and Emily S Sena | <p><strong>Objective</strong><br>Using genetically-modified animals to model neurodevelopmental conditions (NDCs) helps better our understanding of biology underlying these conditions. Animal research has unique characteristics not shared with cli... | Medical Sciences | Chris Chambers | 2023-11-22 10:26:44 | |||
21 Apr 2024
STAGE 1
Mechanisms of secularization: Testing between three causal pathwaysUnderstanding links between secularization, rationalisation and insecurityRecommended by Adrien Fillon based on reviews by Chris Chambers and 1 anonymous reviewer
What relationship can be expected between secularization, rationalisation and insecurity? While some authors argue that rationalisation reduces the willingness to belong to religious groups, others have suggested that insecurity increases this need to belong to religious groups.
In the current study, Lang and Chvaja (2024) will adjudicate between these two possibilities using an economics game in participants from two countries: US and Poland. The central question posed by the authors is whether cooperative insecurity increases the probability of joining a religious normative group. They will test the relationship between an environment (secure and insecure) and institution (which related to the norm context: religious and secular) on the probability of choosing the normative group in an experimental setting. Therefore, the study will be a quantitative analysis.
The authors included an adequate power analysis, alternatives for non-supported hypotheses, and filtering to ensure a high quality of data collection. They also undertook a pilot study to ensure the quality of the procedure and sensitivity of the analyses.
The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over one round of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to reviewers’ and the recommender’s comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and therefore awarded in-principle acceptance.
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/yzgek
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.Lang, M. & Chvaja, R. (2024). Mechanisms of secularization: Testing between the rationalization and existential insecurity theories. In principle acceptance of Version 2 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/yzgek
| Mechanisms of secularization: Testing between three causal pathways | Martin Lang, Radim Chvaja | <p>The study tests two competing explanations of the secularization process related to rationalizing worldviews and decreasing existential insecurity. While the former explanation argues that people are unwilling to join religious groups because o... | Social sciences | Adrien Fillon | 2023-11-22 11:17:30 | |||
25 Jun 2024
STAGE 1
Does ‘virtuality’ affect the role of prior expectations in perception and action? Comparing predictive grip and lifting forces in real and virtual environmentsThe role of prior expectations for lifting objects in virtual realityRecommended by Robert McIntosh based on reviews by 2 anonymous reviewers
As virtual reality environments become more common, it is important to understand our sensorimotor interactions with them. In real world settings, sensory information is supplemented by prior expectations from past experiences, aiding efficient action control. In VR, the relative role of expectations could decrease due to a lack of prior experience with the environment, or increase because sensory information is impoverished or ambiguous. Harris, Arthur and Buckingham (2024) propose to test these possibilities by comparing a real-world object lifting task and a VR version in which the same objects are lifted but visual feedback is substituted by a virtual view. The experiment uses the Size-Weight Illusion (SWI) and the Material Weight Illusion (MWI). In these paradigms, the visual appearance of the object induces expectations about weight that can affect the perception of weight during lifting, and the fingertip forces generated. The degree to which the visual appearance of objects induces differences in perceived weight, and in measured fingertip forces, will index the influence of prior expectations for these two paradigms. The analyses will test whether the influence of prior expectations is lower or higher in the VR set-up than in real-world lifting. The outcomes across tasks (SWI and MWI) and measures (perceived weight, fingertip forces) will broaden our understanding of the role of predictive sensorimotor control in novel virtual environments.
After three rounds of evaluation, with input from two external reviewers, the recommender judged that the Stage 1 manuscript met the criteria for in-principle acceptance (IPA).
URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/36jhb
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. Harris, D. J., Arthur, T., & Buckingham, G. (2024). Does ‘virtuality’ affect the role of prior expectations in perception and action? Comparing predictive grip and lifting forces in real and virtual environments. In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/36jhb
| Does ‘virtuality’ affect the role of prior expectations in perception and action? Comparing predictive grip and lifting forces in real and virtual environments | David J. Harris, Tom Arthur, & Gavin Buckingham | <p>Recent theories in cognitive science propose that prior expectations strongly influence how individuals perceive the world and control their actions. This influence is particularly relevant in novel sensory environments, such as virtual reality... | Life Sciences | Robert McIntosh | Ben van Buren | 2023-11-22 12:25:57 |
