Claims

Registered report authors report more constructive review, greater candor about findings, and time savings

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · theoretical r3 · q1
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q1 i? Authors of registered reports in an education special topic reported that reviewers were more constructive and curious about design decisions when reviewers did not know the findings. → Preregistration and Registered Reports 2021 q1 i? Authors reported the format let them candidly describe null effects, confounds, and uncertainties, and saved analysis time by avoiding repeated re-analyses for reviewers. → Preregistration and Registered Reports 2021 (2)

Evidence

Preregistration and Registered Reports 2021

Preregistration and Registered Reports. (2021). https://osf.io/ya594

q1 · i? · theoretical · r3

Self-report evidence gathered from authors publishing in the AERA Open registered reports special topic, as reported by Reich et al. (2020). The article hedges that "these statements will not be true for every researcher in every study context".

"Registered report authors report that they find that reviewers are more constructive and more curious about research design decisions when they, too, do not know what the findings will be (Reich et al., 2020)."

Preregistration and Registered Reports 2021 (2)

Preregistration and Registered Reports. (2021). https://osf.io/ya594

q1 · i? · theoretical · r3

The article's account of author experiences in its special topic, including one team's report that they "saved so much time on analyses" by not redoing analyses for reviewers. These are author self-reports, not measured outcomes.

"After receiving an in-principle acceptance, researchers can report their findings and be straightforward about null effects, possible confounds, and additional possible interpretations."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id registered-report-authors-report-constructive-review-and-candor
title Registered report authors report more constructive review, greater candor about findings, and time savings
description Registered report authors report more constructive review, greater candor about findings, and time savings
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2021
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — preregistration-and-registered-reports-2021, preregistration-and-registered-reports-2021-2

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.