Reviewing Registered Reports
Registered Reports are a form of empirical article offered by a number of journals at Wiley in which the methods and proposed analyses are pre-registered, reviewed, and, in most cases, published prior to the research being conducted. If the Stage 1 article passes peer review, the Stage 2 article is then provisionally accepted for publication before data collection commences. This format is designed to minimize publication bias and research bias in hypothesis-driven research, while also allowing the flexibility to conduct exploratory (unregistered) analyses and report serendipitous findings.
The review process for Registered Reports is divided into two stages. At Stage 1 (Study Design), reviewers assess study proposals before data are collected. At Stage 2 (Completed Study), reviewers consider the full study, including results and interpretation.
Guidelines for reviewers
Stage 1: Study design
Stage 1 manuscripts will include only an Introduction, Methods (including proposed analyses), and Pilot Data (where applicable). In considering Stage 1 manuscripts, reviewers will be expected to assess:
- The importance of the research question(s), for journals that normally include this as a criterion for acceptance.
- The logic, rationale, and plausibility of the proposed hypotheses.
- The soundness and feasibility of the methodology and analysis pipeline (including statistical power analysis where appropriate).
- Whether the clarity and degree of methodological detail is sufficient to exactly replicate the proposed experimental procedures and analysis pipeline.
- Whether the authors have pre-specified sufficient outcome-neutral tests for ensuring that the results obtained are able to test the stated hypotheses, including positive controls and quality checks.
Following Stage 1 peer review, manuscripts will be accepted, offered the opportunity to revise, or rejected outright. The acceptance of a Stage 1 manuscript means that the Stage 2 manuscript will also be eligible for publication pending successful completion of the study according to the pre-registered methods and analytic procedures, as well as a defensible and evidence-based interpretation of the results. The Stage 1 article will be published after it’s accepted, unless under embargo.
Stage 2: Completed study
Following completion of the study, authors will write the Stage 2 article, including Results and Discussion sections. These Stage 2 manuscripts will more closely resemble a regular article format. The manuscript will then be returned to the reviewers, who will be asked to appraise:
- Whether the data are able to test the authors’ proposed hypotheses by satisfying the approved outcome-neutral conditions (such as quality checks, positive controls)
- Whether the Introduction, rationale and stated hypotheses are the same as the approved Stage 1 submission (required)
- Whether the authors adhered precisely to the registered experimental procedures
- Whether any unregistered post hoc analyses added by the authors are justified, methodologically sound, and informative
- Whether the authors’ conclusions are justified given the data
Reviewers at Stage 2 may suggest that authors report additional post hoc tests on their data; however, authors are not obliged to do so unless such tests are necessary to satisfy one or more of the Stage 2 review criteria. Please note that editorial decisions will be based on adherence to the approved protocols and experimental design in Stage 1 and conclusions supported by data (even if they are negative findings) as opposed to novelty and perceived importance of results.
Once published, the Stage 1 and Stage 2 articles will be clearly linked within the journal.