@Steve_Lindsay@fediscience.org
Post #904288
2026-03-05 05:56 UTC
Question for journal editors who handle experimental psych submissions: Have you ever offered authors who receive a reject/revise/resubmit decision requiring an additional experiment the option of doing that follow-up experiment as a sort of Registered Report -- that is, pledge that if they do the follow-up experiment as agreed (including decent statistical power to detect a reasonable smallest effect size of interest) you will accept the manuscript regardless of the outcome? Pros and cons of doing that?
Replies (3)
-
@lakens@mastodon.social 2026-03-05 07:43
@Steve_Lindsay I do not edit, but I think it makes perfect sense. I have heard some anecdotes of people doing this, but, I can't point to any sources.
-
@satrevik@fediscience.org 2026-03-05 08:11
@Steve_Lindsay It sounds like a good idea, as long as it is applied cautiously (the editor / peer-reviewer will have considerable power to make the authors redo the study as they would have preferred it). Also note that early career researchers may not be able to collect more data (due to e.g. thesis deadline or lacking funds), and this may force them to redraw rather than revise.
-
@embe9000@mastodon.sdf.org 2026-03-05 20:20
@Steve_Lindsay I've done it as reviewer and editor. Nothing but good experiences.