Channels contributed to:Behind the Paper
sounds really transparent. But how, within this pre-registration framework, do you deal with re-analyses that come up during rounds of peer review, or during interactions with colleagues (eg in conferences)?
thanks for this interesting post
Hi Ruben...There are a couple of different lines of thinking on this. 1) Once analyses are pre-registered, not only should authors have less latitude to add additional analyses, so should reviewers to propose additional analyses. One extreme is to have the analyses reviewed ahead of time and then locked in. Once that happens, you can't deviate. 2) Additional analyses can be added (or current ones changed) but there must be a record of what is "exploratory". We did something similar to this in our methods section. I think the protocols would progress to differentiate those additional analyses suggested by coauthors vs. reviewers.