» Articles » PMID: 35814910

A Survey on How Preregistration Affects the Research Workflow: Better Science but More Work

Overview
Journal R Soc Open Sci
Specialty Science
Date 2022 Jul 11
PMID 35814910
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The preregistration of research protocols and analysis plans is a main reform innovation to counteract confirmation bias in the social and behavioural sciences. While theoretical reasons to preregister are frequently discussed in the literature, the individually experienced advantages and disadvantages of this method remain largely unexplored. The goal of this exploratory study was to identify the perceived benefits and challenges of preregistration from the researcher's perspective. To this end, we surveyed 355 researchers, 299 of whom had used preregistration in their own work. The researchers indicated the experienced or expected effects of preregistration on their workflow. The results show that experiences and expectations are mostly positive. Researchers in our sample believe that implementing preregistration improves or is likely to improve the quality of their projects. Criticism of preregistration is primarily related to the increase in work-related stress and the overall duration of the project. While the benefits outweighed the challenges for the majority of researchers with preregistration experience, this was not the case for the majority of researchers without preregistration experience. The experienced advantages and disadvantages identified in our survey could inform future efforts to improve preregistration and thus help the methodology gain greater acceptance in the scientific community.

Citing Articles

Simulation studies of social systems: telling the story based on provenance patterns.

Wilsdorf P, Reinhardt O, Prike T, Hinsch M, Bijak J, Uhrmacher A R Soc Open Sci. 2024; 11(8):240258.

PMID: 39113768 PMC: 11304336. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.240258.


The bioinformatics landscape in environmental omics: Lessons from a national ELIXIR survey.

Gioti A, Theodosopoulou D, Bravakos P, Magoulas A, Kotoulas G iScience. 2024; 27(6):110062.

PMID: 38947499 PMC: 11214481. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110062.


Supporting study registration to reduce research waste.

Purgar M, Glasziou P, Klanjscek T, Nakagawa S, Culina A Nat Ecol Evol. 2024; 8(8):1391-1399.

PMID: 38839851 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-024-02433-5.


Demystifying Open Science in health psychology and behavioral medicine: a practical guide to Registered Reports and Data Notes.

Norris E, OMahony A, Coyne R, Varol T, Green J, Reynolds J Health Psychol Behav Med. 2024; 12(1):2351939.

PMID: 38817594 PMC: 11138224. DOI: 10.1080/21642850.2024.2351939.


Preregistration in practice: A comparison of preregistered and non-preregistered studies in psychology.

van den Akker O, van Assen M, Bakker M, Elsherif M, Wong T, Wicherts J Behav Res Methods. 2023; 56(6):5424-5433.

PMID: 37950113 PMC: 11335781. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-023-02277-0.


References
1.
Steegen S, Tuerlinckx F, Gelman A, Vanpaemel W . Increasing Transparency Through a Multiverse Analysis. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2016; 11(5):702-712. DOI: 10.1177/1745691616658637. View

2.
Spellman B . A Short (Personal) Future History of Revolution 2.0. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015; 10(6):886-99. DOI: 10.1177/1745691615609918. View

3.
Field S, Wagenmakers E, Kiers H, Hoekstra R, Ernst A, van Ravenzwaaij D . The effect of preregistration on trust in empirical research findings: results of a registered report. R Soc Open Sci. 2020; 7(4):181351. PMC: 7211853. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.181351. View

4.
Kidwell M, Lazarevic L, Baranski E, Hardwicke T, Piechowski S, Falkenberg L . Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency. PLoS Biol. 2016; 14(5):e1002456. PMC: 4865119. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002456. View

5.
Haven T, Van Grootel D . Preregistering qualitative research. Account Res. 2019; 26(3):229-244. DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2019.1580147. View