Easy preregistration will benefit any research
David Thomas Mellor and
Brian A. Nosek
Additional contact information
David Thomas Mellor: Center for Open Science
Brian A. Nosek: University of Virginia
No dhc2e, MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science
There is shared support by Riley et al., (RRL1) and Wolfe & Kanwisher (WK2) for the principles to “increase transparency, rigor, and reproducibility of science” and “[fulfill] an inherent commitment to study participants and the public”1. These principles are motivating the expansion of NIH Guidelines requiring study registration and outcome reporting into basic science. Prospective study registration (i.e. “preregistration”) distinguishes confirmatory tests of predictions from discoveries resulting from exploration3. Unintentionally conflating these modes of research increases the publishability of findings at the expense of their credibility4. Further, outcome reporting, whether or not the study is ultimately published, addresses publication bias and selective ignoring of null results5. Widespread preregistration and outcome reporting may address key contributing causes of the so-called “Reproducibility Crisis”6, and would increase the interpretability of most empirical research.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:metaar:dhc2e
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().