Submit a report


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 can 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.



Sight vs. sound in the judgment of music performance: Cross-cultural evidence from classical piano and Tsugaru shamisen competitions use asterix (*) to get italics
Gakuto Chiba, Yuto Ozaki, Shinya Fujii, Patrick E. SavagePlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
<p style="text-align: justify;">​​Which information dominates in evaluating performance in music? Both experts and laypeople consistently report believing that sound should be the most important domain when judging music competitions, but experimental studies of Western participants rating video-only vs. audio-only versions of 6-second excerpts of Western classical performances have shown that in at least some cases visual information can play a stronger role. However, whether this phenomenon applies generally to music competitions or is restricted to specific repertoires or contexts is disputed. In this Registered Report, we focus on testing the generalizability of sight vs. sound effects by replicating previous studies of classical piano competitions with Japanese participants, while also expanding the same paradigm using new examples from competitions of a traditional Japanese folk musical instrument, the Tsugaru shamisen. . For both classical piano and Tsugaru shamisen, we ask participants to choose the winner between the 1st- and 2nd- placing performers in 5 competitions and the 1st-place and low-ranking performers in 5 competitions (i.e., 40 performers total from 10 piano and 10 shamisen competitions). &nbsp;We will test the following three predictions twice each (once for piano and once for shamisen): 1) an interaction is predicted between domain (video-only vs. audio-only) and variance in quality (choosing between 1st and 2nd place vs. choosing between 1st and low-placing performers); 2) visuals are predicted to trump sound when variation in quality is low (1st vs. 2nd place); and 3) sound is predicted to trump visuals when variation in quality is high (1st vs. low-placings). Data from pilot experiments (n = 9 participants) suggest that participants are mostly able to correctly select the actual winning performers based on short excerpts at levels above chance. In Stage 2, we will collect a full sample of 155 participants in order to achieve 80% power to detect effects of at least Cohen’s <em>d</em> = 0.4. Our results will reveal the generalizability of sight vs. sound effects to non-Western participants and musical traditions, and may have practical applications to evaluation criteria for performers, judges, and organizers of competitions, concerts, and auditions.​​</p>
You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
music cognition, cross-cultural, cultural evolution, audiovisual, performance studies
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Social sciences
No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe []
2021-09-24 08:59:26
Yuki Yamada
Kyoshiro Sasaki