#PreRegistration
LightNews LightNews
astrokatie.com
Every such article should trigger an automatic follow-up on the stated date, like the preregistration of a clinical trial
davelevitan.bsky.social Dave Levitan @davelevitan.bsky.social · Aug 18
There are high-up editors at prestigious publications who wrote or greenlit like dozens of “Moon Base to Open Within Six Years” or “Space Hotel Slated for 2026” headlines. Nothing happened to them. They just get to keep doing it. Wild.
August 18, 2026 at 1:30 AM
handle.invalid
The English version of Umamusume: Pretty Derby will release on June 26, and preregistration will begin on April 28!

#umamusume
April 27, 2025 at 1:09 PM
johnholbein1.bsky.social
Wow.

Look at how rapidly preregistration has become the norm in experimental economics.
May 21, 2025 at 5:29 PM
withthewill.bsky.social
Preregistration gets you Gekkomon.
March 22, 2026 at 2:44 AM
sanjaysrivastava.com
I don’t know why everyone’s confused. The pro preregistration people preregistered their preregistration paper. The preregistration pokers peeked at the preregistration paper’s preregistration and popped its preregistration positivity. Perfectly plain, people
stephaniemlee.bsky.social Stephanie M. Lee @stephaniemlee.bsky.social · Sep 24
Yesterday, Nature Human Behaviour accidentally revealed to the world that this study had been retracted — a technical glitch, they tell me.

Now it's officially officially retracted. And you can read the backstory of what happened: www.chronicle.com/article/this...
September 24, 2024 at 4:38 PM
lspitzer.bsky.social
Today, I'm in Bielefeld presenting a #preregistration beginner workshop to PhD students, talking about what a preregistration is, why it's important to preregister, and how to create a preregistration.🎉 @zpid.bsky.social #OpenScience
May 18, 2026 at 8:47 AM
jessicahullman.bsky.social
Yesterday a student in my AI for Social Sci seminar used parapsychology to introduce replication crisis, saying "reforms like preregistration reduce threats." So I filled them in on the parapsychological origins of the study claiming to show preregistration works, by a creator of preregistration 👻
edhagen.net Ed Hagen @edhagen.net · Jan 23
The recently retracted Protzko et al. study had a similarly flaky idea at it's core (from the Matters Arising by @jbakcoleman.bsky.social and @devezer.bsky.social): www.nature.com/articles/s41...
Protzko et al.1 describe a project in which internal tests of pilot-tested hypotheses and independent replications embraced “rigour-enhancing practices” such as confirmatory tests, large sample sizes, preregistration and methodological transparency. The authors report a high estimate of replicability, which, in their appraisal, “justifies confidence in rigour-enhancing methods to increase the replicability of new discoveries” (see Abstract). However, replicability was not the original outcome of interest in the project, and analyses associated with replicability were not preregistered as claimed. Instead of replicability, the originally planned study set out to examine whether the mere act of scientifically investigating a phenomenon (data collection or analysis) could cause effect sizes to decline on subsequent investigation (https://osf.io/ba8p7). This “decline effect” hypothesis, posited by one of the authors and not articulated in the published manuscript, invokes phenomena that, if found, could revise the “laws of reality”2. The project did not yield support for this preregistered hypothesis; the preregistered analyses on the decline effect and the resulting null findings were largely relegated to the supplement, and the published article instead focused on replicability, with a set of non-preregistered measures and analyses, despite claims to the contrary.
January 23, 2026 at 9:01 PM
markrubin.bsky.social
Just published…

I argue that preregistration does not improve the transparent evaluation of the severity of hypothesis tests (a) in Popper’s approach or (b) in Mayo’s error statistical approach when preregistration is treated as “a plan, not a prison.”

Open Access: doi.org/10.1007/s112...
One justification for preregistering research hypotheses, methods, and analyses is that it improves the transparent evaluation of the severity of hypothesis tests. In this article, I consider two cases in which preregistration does not improve this evaluation. First, I argue that, although preregistration may facilitate the transparent evaluation of severity in Mayo’s error statistical philosophy of science, it does not facilitate this evaluation in Popper’s theory-centric approach. To illustrate, I show that associated concerns about Type I error rate inflation are only relevant in the error statistical approach and not in a theory-centric approach. Second, I argue that a test procedure that is preregistered but that also allows deviations in its implementation (i.e., “a plan, not a prison”) does not provide a more transparent evaluation of Mayoian severity than a non-preregistered procedure. In particular, I argue that sample-based validity-enhancing deviations cause an unknown inflation of the test procedure’s Type I error rate and, consequently, an unknown reduction in its capability to license inferences severely. I conclude that preregistration does not improve the transparent evaluation of severity (a) in Popper’s philosophy of science or (b) in Mayo’s approach when deviations are allowed.
August 22, 2025 at 6:43 AM
drcpennington.bsky.social
✨ PREPRINT 📖🤩

"Study Preregistration: A How-To Guide"

Written for students, this guide outlines the 'what, why, and how' of preregistration, perceived barriers and their solutions, and 10 top tips to adopting and/or critically evaluating this open research practice.

osf.io/preprints/ps...
OSF
osf.io
November 26, 2024 at 6:26 PM
kientan74.bsky.social
Mmmm, nope, the EU definitely hasn’t fixed the EES registration and entry procedure yet…
Queue for EES preregistration at Munich Airport - still ahead… Queue for EES preregistration at Munich Airport - behind me…
September 23, 2026 at 12:10 PM
nystre.bsky.social
nystre Defeated preregistration.
March 19, 2026 at 8:46 PM
briannosek.bsky.social
A new preregistration template for simulation studies is now live on OSF. Thanks to the creators and the preregistration template working group for proposing and shepherding this to make it available to users.

See the post if you would like to propose a new template.

www.cos.io/blog/introdu...
Introducing the Simulation Studies Preregistration Template: Q&A with Björn S. Siepe, František Bartoš, and Samuel Pawel
Initially submitted through COS’s open call for community-designed preregistration templates, the Simulation Studies Template is now part of the expanding collection of preregistration resources avail...
www.cos.io
July 29, 2025 at 1:49 PM
syeducation.bsky.social
New blog post! "Preregistration: More Promises than Pitfalls," some thoughts inspired by the recent meeting at the Royal Society. I don't find many pitfalls with preregistration itself, but there are plenty of problems with how we talk about it. getsyeducated.substack.com/p/preregistr...
Preregistration: More Promises than Pitfalls
Or, maybe the real pitfalls are different from what we usually think
getsyeducated.substack.com
March 15, 2024 at 1:24 PM
cos.io
Simulation studies are widely used, but have historically lacked clear guidance around preregistration.

In response to this gap, a team of researchers have developed a new template for preregistering simulation studies, now available on OSF.

🚀 Read our Q&A: www.cos.io/blog/intr...
Introducing the Simulation Studies Preregistration Template: Q&A with Björn S. Siepe, František Bartoš, and Samuel Pawel
Initially submitted through COS’s open call for community-designed preregistration templates, the Simulation Studies Template is now part of the expanding collection of preregistration resources available on the OSF.
www.cos.io
July 29, 2025 at 3:48 PM
albertsonb2.bsky.social
what if preregistration isn't the answer...
September 28, 2024 at 2:06 AM
markrubin.bsky.social
Perspectives on Preregistration

Nice review of the different perspectives on preregistration by Yke Bauke Eisma and Joost de Winter.

Preprint: www.researchgate.net/publication/...
The replication crisis has accelerated the adoption of open science practices, with study preregistration having emerged as a vital, yet contested, reform. This review synthesizes the discourse surrounding preregistration into four perspectives: (1) Idealist, (2) Pragmatist, (3) Skeptic, and (4) Innovator. Idealists view preregistration as essential to hypothesis testing by separating confirmatory and exploratory analyses and preventing HARKing and p-hacking. Pragmatists highlight workable infrastructure, including templates, registries, and deviation-reporting tools, in order to integrate preregistration into actual scientific workflows. Skeptics caution about the rigidity of preregistration, administrative burden, performative compliance, and displacement of deeper problems such as weak theory, as well as opportunities to game the system. Innovators extend preregistration through Registered Reports, adaptive and versioned plans, and computationally integrated pipelines that document exploration while preserving transparency. In conclusion, the discourse surrounding preregistration is not a simple debate between proponents and opponents but an interplay of diverse perspectives, with tensions between confirmatory rigor and exploratory discovery, and between top-down policies and bottom-up reform.
August 28, 2025 at 10:50 AM
brendannyhan.bsky.social
Friends don't let friends give preregistration a bad name. Exploratory findings are fine; you just have to label them!
davidryanmiller.com David Ryan Miller @davidryanmiller.com · Sep 12
Love it when you 1) do a proper preregistration, 2) find an unexpected finding in the course of examining your preregistered hypotheses, 3) present the unexpected finding as exploratory, and 4) a reviewer HAMMERS you for "undermining the integrity of the preregistration process?" 🫠
September 12, 2025 at 1:55 PM
psyarxivbot.bsky.social
Best Laid Plans: A Guide to Reporting Preregistration Deviations: http://osf.io/dwx69/
October 26, 2023 at 3:08 PM
klonskylab.bsky.social
Preregistration mandates have done a great job teaching the field to put the word “preregistration” in our articles. Mission accomplished.
December 24, 2024 at 2:53 AM
davidryanmiller.com
Love it when you 1) do a proper preregistration, 2) find an unexpected finding in the course of examining your preregistered hypotheses, 3) present the unexpected finding as exploratory, and 4) a reviewer HAMMERS you for "undermining the integrity of the preregistration process?" 🫠
September 12, 2025 at 1:50 PM
ruben.the100.ci
If you were planning on secretly deviating from your preregistration, you might wanna change plans.
jamiecummins.bsky.social Jamie Cummins @jamiecummins.bsky.social · Jul 14
Today we launch the first stable release of RegCheck: v1.0.0.

RegCheck makes it easier and quicker to compare study registrations to published papers for consistency - something we know is important in principle, but rarely done in practice.

A 🧵 on what's new:

regcheck.app
RegCheck
RegCheck is an AI tool to compare preregistrations with papers instantly.
regcheck.app
July 14, 2026 at 4:38 PM
lakens.bsky.social
My paper 'When and How to Deviate From a Preregistration' is now published at Collabra Psychology.
online.ucpress.edu/collabra/art...
When and How to Deviate From a Preregistration
As the practice of preregistration becomes more common, researchers need guidance in how to report deviations from their preregistered statistical analysis plan. A principled approach to the use of pr...
online.ucpress.edu
May 13, 2024 at 12:54 PM
devezer.bsky.social
Besides that, planning ≠ preregistration

Researchers have been making research plans since long before the notion of prereg even existed. Besides, preregistration cannot and does not guarantee proper research planning. These false equivalences obscure what's what.
May 1, 2025 at 1:50 AM
markrubin.bsky.social
A New Argument for Preregistration

Preregistration can increase the quality of hypotheses before they're tested

Preprint: doi.org/10.31222/osf...

By Agata Bochynska & @giosuebaggio.bsky.social
Study preregistrations and theory development have been proposed as independent strategies for improving the quality, transparency, robustness, and reproducibility of research. Yet, a discussion of how theory and preregistration could interact and complement each other towards improved science is currently lacking. Here, we argue that hypothesis preregistration could stimulate theory development by serving various roles, depending on the availability or quality of theories and hypotheses in a field at any given time. We suggest that, in appropriate conditions, preregistration can increase the quality of hypotheses before they are tested, with indirect beneficial effects on theory development. In fields where theories are less developed or agreed upon, or are lacking altogether, hypothesis preregistration can nudge researchers to improve and share their hypotheses, engaging their community and facilitating accumulation and development of hypotheses. As a field’s theories and hypotheses become more advanced and better understood, hypothesis preregistration can become less important: the theory itself can function as a public repository of hypotheses and can constrain methodological aspects of research. We explore possible relations and synergies between hypothesis preregistration and theory development in a range of scenarios. We conclude with a discussion of implications and recommendations for researchers and meta-scientists.
February 26, 2025 at 7:45 PM
zpid.bsky.social
🌟 We have launched our preregistration platform PreReg! 🌟

PreReg guides researchers through all the steps of pre-registration and now offers an even clearer structure.

#Preregistration #OpenScience #Psychology
leibniz-psychology.org/en/news/deta...
The new version of PreReg is now available via: https://prereg-psych.org
February 12, 2025 at 12:44 PM