The authors have done an excellent job at addressing reviewer comments and amending issues identified with the methodology. I have no further comments at this stage.
DOI or URL of the report: https://osf.io/zc4w5/
Revised manuscript: https://osf.io/rqdn2/
All revised materials uploaded to: https://osf.io/gwcbt/, updated manuscript under sub-directory "PCIRR Stage 1\PCI-RR submission following R&R"
Two reviewers have now provided rapid and helpful assessments the Stage 1 manuscript. As you will see, both evaluations are generally positive, noting the value of the replication (and extension), as well as the adherence to rigorous open practices. The reviews do, however, note a range of areas requiring careful revision, including strengthening of the study rationale, clarification (and likely correction) of a range of specific methodological details, tightening the link between the critical design elements, ensuring that the analysis plans are statistically valid, and ensuring that the study itself avoids stigmatising language. All of these issues fall within the typical expectations for a Stage 1 RR, and on this basis I am happy to invite a revision.