Abstract
Clinical trials are routinely preregistered. In psychology and the social sciences, however, only a small percentage of studies are preregistered, and those preregistrations often contain ambiguities. As advocates strive for broader uptake and effective use of preregistration, they can benefit from drawing on the experience of preregistration in clinical trials and adapting some of those successes to the psychology and social sciences context. We recommend that individuals and organizations who promote preregistration: (1) Establish core preregistration criteria required to consider a preregistration complete; (2) Award preregistered badges only to articles that meet the badge criteria; and (3) Leverage complementary workflows that provide a similar function as preregistration.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | Journal of Trial and Error |
| Volume | 2 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 15 May 2023 |
Bibliographical note
Funding: Robert Thibault is supported by a general support grant awarded to METRICS from Arnold Ventures and a postdoctoral fellowship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Marcus Munafo and Robert Thibault are part of the MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit (MC_UU_00011/7). The funders have no role in the preparation of this manuscript or the decision to publish.Copyright the Authors 2023. Authors retain copyright to the work, and agree to license the work under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License, which allows others to access, remix, and share the work for any purpose, given that an acknowledgement of the initial publication in this journal and the author are present.
Keywords
- blind data analysis
- preregistration
- prospective registration
- badges
- Open Science