The Potential of Preregistration in Psychology: Assessing Preregistration Producibility and Preregistration-Study Consistency
Name:
The potential of preregistration ...
Size:
558.8Kb
Format:
PDF
Request:
Article - AAM
Authors
van den Akker, Olmo R.Bakker, Marjan
van Assen, Marcel A. L. M.
Pennington, Charlotte R.
Verweij, Leone
Elsherif, Mahmoud M.
Claesen, Aline
Gaillard, Stefan D. M.
Yeung, Siu Kit
Frankenberger, Jan-Luca
Krautter, Kai
Cockcroft, Jamie P.
Kreuer, Katharina S.
Evans, Thomas Rhys
Heppel, Frédérique M.
Schoch, Sarah F.
Korbmacher, Max
Yamada, Yuki
Albayrak-Aydemir, Nihan
Alzahawi, Shilaan
Sarafoglou, Alexandra
Sitnikov, Maksim M.
Děchtěrenko, Filip
Wingen, Sophia
Grinschgl, Sandra
Hartmann, Helena
Stewart, Suzanne L. K.
de Oliveira, Cátia M. F.
Ashcroft-Jones, Sarah
Baker, Bradley J.
Wicherts, Jelte M.
Affiliation
Tilburg University; Aston University; University of Leicester; KU Leuven; Radboud University; Chinese University of Hong Kong; Harvard Business School; University of York; University of Greenwich; University of Amsterdam; Western Norway University of Applied Sciences; Kyushu University; Open University; Stanford University; Czech Academy of Sciences; University of Cologne; University Graz; University Hospital Essen; University of Chester; University of Oxford; Temple UniversityPublication Date
2024-10-10
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Study preregistration has become increasingly popular in psychology, but its potential to restrict researcher degrees of freedom has not yet been empirically verified. We used an extensive protocol to assess the producibility (i.e., the degree to which a study can be properly conducted based on the available information) of preregistrations and the consistency between preregistrations and their corresponding papers for 300 psychology studies. We found that preregistrations often lack methodological details and that undisclosed deviations from preregistered plans are frequent. These results highlight that biases due to researcher degrees of freedom remain possible in many preregistered studies. More comprehensive registration templates typically yielded more producible preregistrations. We did not find that the producibility and consistency of preregistrations differed over time or between original and replication studies. Furthermore, we found that operationalizations of variables were generally preregistered more producible and consistently than other study parts. Inconsistencies between preregistrations and published studies were mainly encountered for data collection procedures, statistical models, and exclusion criteria. Our results indicate that, to unlock the full potential of preregistration, researchers in psychology should aim to write more producible preregistrations, adhere to these preregistrations more faithfully, and more transparently report any deviations from their preregistrations. This could be facilitated by training and education to improve preregistration skills, as well as the development of more comprehensive templates.Citation
van den Akker, O. R., Bakker, M., van Assen, M. A. L. M., Pennington, C. R., Verweij, L., Elsherif, M. M., Claesen, A., Gaillard, S. D. M., Yeung, S. K., Frankenberger, J.-L., Krautter, K., Cockcroft, J. P., Kreuer, K. S., Evans, T. R., Heppel, F. M., Schoch, S. F., Korbmacher, M., Yamada, Y., Albayrak-Aydemir, N., ... Wicherts, J. M. (2024). The potential of preregistration in psychology: Assessing preregistration producibility and preregistration-study consistency. Psychological Methods, vol(issue), pages. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000687Publisher
American Psychological AssociationJournal
Psychological MethodsAdditional Links
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-33919-001Type
ArticleDescription
©American Psychological Association, [2024]. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. The final article is available, upon publication, at: https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000687ISSN
1082-989XEISSN
1939-1463Sponsors
unfundedae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1037/met0000687
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/