ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Preregistration in practice: A comparison of preregistered and non-preregistered studies in psychology.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Brain Association Studies in 2024: A Systematic Review of Sample Sizes and Preregistrations.Psychophysiology · 2026Pooled it
- The Uptake of Preregistration, and Its Impact on the Proportion of Supported Hypotheses, in Sports Science.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- A survey of researchers' attitudes to preregistration in animal research reveals multiple perceived barriers to adoption.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- Opportunities and pitfalls of data contextualization in neuroimaging.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2026Review
- A call for preregistration of in vitro research : Pregistration as a tool to improve reproducibility and transparency.EMBO reports · 2026Article
- Accuracy in parameter estimation and simulation approaches for sample-size planning accounting for item effects.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Ten particularly frequent and consequential questionable research practices in quantitative research: Bias mechanisms, preventive strategies, and a simulation-based framework.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Article
- Can I trust this paper?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- Challenges and opportunities of psychological aging research.European journal of ageing · 2025Review
- Questionable and Improved Research Practices in Single-Case Experimental Design: Initial Investigation and Findings.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Article
- Article
- Bias in data-driven replicability analysis of univariate brain-wide association studies.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Novelty, Consistency, Transparency: The Trilemma of Psychological Sciences and its Consequences on Open Science Practices.International review of social psychology · 2025Article
- A template and tutorial for preregistering studies using passive smartphone measures.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Article
- Effects of auditory stimuli during exhaustive exercise on cerebral oxygenation and psychophysical responses.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preregistration has gained traction as one of the most promising solutions to improve the replicability of scientific effects. In this project, we compared 193 psychology studies that earned a Preregistration Challenge prize or preregistration badge to 193 related studies that were not preregistered. In contrast to our theoretical expectations and prior research, we did not find that preregistered studies had a lower proportion of positive results (Hypothesis 1), smaller effect sizes (Hypothesis 2), or fewer statistical errors (Hypothesis 3) than non-preregistered studies. Supporting our Hypotheses 4 and 5, we found that preregistered studies more often contained power analyses and typically had larger sample sizes than non-preregistered studies. Finally, concerns about the publishability and impact of preregistered studies seem unwarranted, as preregistered studies did not take longer to publish and scored better on several impact measures. Overall, our data indicate that preregistration has beneficial effects in the realm of statistical power and impact, but we did not find robust evidence that preregistration prevents p-hacking and HARKing (Hypothesizing After the Results are Known).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.