Submit a report

Announcements

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.


 

405

Researcher Predictions of Effect Generalizability Across Global Samplesuse asterix (*) to get italics
Kathleen Schmidt, Priya Silverstein, & Christopher R. ChartierPlease 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"
2023
<p>The generalizability of effects is an increasing concern among researchers in psychological science. Traditionally, the field has relied on university samples from Europe and North America to make claims about humans writ large. The proposed research will examine researcher predictions regarding the generalizability of four psychological effects. Predictions of outcomes and effect sizes overall and within regional subsamples will be compared to the results of four large scale international collaborative studies. We will also examine relationships between researcher characteristics and prediction accuracy. Our investigation will reveal whether researchers can accurately predict the generalizability of these psychological effects across cultural contexts while offering insight into what features of the researchers are related to their prediction accuracy.</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://
generalizability, psychology, metascience, prediction, forecasting, context sensitivity, cross-cultural differences
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 [john@doe.com]
2023-02-16 03:49:35
Chris Chambers