Reading focus
Syllabus: How Can Psychological Science Become More Reliable?
Distinguish commitments about predictions, analyses and publication from one another.
Why you’re reading it. Understand what a prospective record makes assessable while preserving transparent exploration.
A question to consider. If an exploratory result becomes a new prediction, what would a subsequent study need to make that progression clear?
Why this reading
Knowing when a prediction or analysis decision was made changes how we interpret its evidence. Nosek and colleagues explain a rationale for recording plans and examine practical departures from the ideal of planning before observing outcomes.
Before you read
Prediction concerns evidence not yet used to construct a claim; postdiction fits what is already known. Preregistration records intentions. A Registered Report also involves prospective review and a conditional publication commitment. Neither label establishes a study’s quality.
Read for
- Distinguish recording hypotheses from specifying how evidence will be analyzed.
- Examine how deviations, existing data and exploration can be reported transparently.
- Separate the proposed benefits from evidence that the practice achieves them.
Consider afterwards
- Unexpected missing data make a planned analysis unsuitable. How could a report preserve a clear account of what changed and why?
Editorial context
This reform argument does not show that registration repairs weak theory, measurement or analysis. Ledgerwood’s commentary and the authors’ reply sharpen the distinction between predictions and analysis plans.