Do Pre-Registration and Pre-analysis Plans Reduce p-Hacking and Publication Bias?

Abel Brodeur, Nikolai Cook, Jonathan Hartley and Anthony Heyes

No uxf39, MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science

Abstract: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are increasingly prominent in economics, with pre-registration and pre-analysis plans (PAPs) promoted as important in ensuring the credibility of findings. We investigate whether these tools reduce the extent of p-hacking and publication bias by collecting and studying the universe of test statistics, 15,992 in total, from RCTs published in 15 leading economics journals from 2018 through 2021. In our primary analysis, we find no meaningful difference in the distribution of test statistics from pre-registered studies, compared to their non-pre-registered counterparts. However, pre-registered studies that have a complete PAP are significantly less p-hacked. These results point to the importance of PAPs, rather than pre-registration in itself, in ensuring credibility.

Date: 2022-08-11
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ecm, nep-exp and nep-sog
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/62f54a9f170d5205dec27a82/

Related works:
Working Paper: Do Pre-registration and Pre-analysis Plans Reduce P-Hacking and Publication Bias? (2022)
Working Paper: Do Pre-Registration and Pre-analysis Plans Reduce p-Hacking and Publication Bias? (2022)
Working Paper: Do Pre-Registration and Pre-analysis Plans Reduce p-Hacking and Publication Bias? (2022)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:metaar:uxf39

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/uxf39

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in MetaArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().