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 will 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.



Does retrieval practice protect memory against stress? A meta-analysis [Stage 1 Registered Report]use asterix (*) to get italics
Mariela Mihaylova, Matthias Kliegel, Nicolas RothenPlease 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>[Note: This is a Stage 1 Registered Report. All placeholders will be replaced with actual results by Stage 2.]</p> <p><br>Stressors such as test anxiety (TA) are known to decrease memory retrieval, whereas retrieval practice (RP) is the phenomenon that actively recalling information from memory enhances memory. Recent evidence suggests RP can protect memory against the negative effects of stress on memory (Agarwal et al., 2014; Smith &amp; Thomas, 2016), however the findings are mixed (Yang et al., 2020). Determining the overall effects of using RP to counteract the negative effects of stress on memory could transform our understanding of memory resilience and help design new cognitive interventions to protect memory in stressful situations when it could be impaired. This therefore raises the need for a meta-analytic summary of the literature to understand the effects of RP on memory in relation to stressors. In this registered report, we conducted a meta-analysis (k = [enter number of studies by Stage 2], total number of participants = [enter no. of participants by Stage 2]) of the impact of stress on learning with RP from [year/date of coverage], among [sample characteristics, if applicable, remove if irrelevant], using [databases and other information sources, Beller et al., 2013]. [Describe the eligibility criteria, Beller et al., 2013] We found [weak to no / mixed / substantial / strong] empirical evidence for the [Phenomenon name] hypothesis, [Hedge’s g / Cohen’s d / Other Effect Size Measure = X.XX, 95% CI [X.XX, X.XX]]., with [model(s), e.g., multivariate three-level model]. [Phenomenon name] is a meaningful effect for [measure(s)/dependent variable(s)]. Study heterogeneity was [low / low to medium / medium / medium to high / high], [Q(degrees of freedom) = XXX.XX, p = .XXX / &lt; .001, I² = XX.XX%]. [Summarize results of publication biases tests]. We tested several moderators: [list of possible moderators tested]. We found that [list of moderator(s) with meaningful moderation, if there were any] moderated [Phenomenon name]. [Phenomenon name] was stronger [list of conditions in which the effects were stronger, if there was/were]. [Brief descriptions of strengths and limitations, Beller et al., 2013, and future research directions] We registered our meta-analysis here, with datafile, code and supplementary:</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://
retrieval practice, meta-analysis, registered report, memory, test anxiety, stress
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Humanities, 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 []
2023-02-16 14:39:06
Thomas Evans