Skip to main content

Lessons from the First Two Years of Operating a Study Registry

🧐 Skeptical/Critical β†—
Watt, Caroline, Kennedy, James E β€’ 2015 Modern Era β€’ methodology

πŸ“Œ Appears in:

Plain English Summary

Back in 2012, right when psychology was reckoning with its massive replication crisis, the Koestler Parapsychology Unit at the University of Edinburgh launched a study registry -- basically a public promise board where researchers had to declare exactly what they planned to test before they tested it. The idea was borrowed from clinical medicine, where pre-registration keeps drug companies honest. The results were eye-opening: nearly every submission had gaps or missing details. Even more damning, the authors called out the popular Open Science Framework for letting researchers quietly hide their registrations after peeking at results -- completely defeating the purpose. They also pointed to famous parapsychology studies by Bem and others that, despite big splashes, never settled the debates they sparked, precisely because confirmatory rigor (locking in your predictions ahead of time) was missing.

Links

Related Papers

Also by these authors

More in Methodology

πŸ“‹ Cite this paper
APA
Watt, Caroline, Kennedy, James E (2015). Lessons from the First Two Years of Operating a Study Registry. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00173
BibTeX
@article{watt_2015_lessons,
  title = {Lessons from the First Two Years of Operating a Study Registry},
  author = {Watt, Caroline and Kennedy, James E},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00173},
}