Publishing Registered Reports in Management and Applied Psychology: Common Beliefs and Best Practices

Roman Briker*, Fabiola H. Gerpott

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Management and applied psychology scholars are confronted with a crisis undermining trust in their findings. One solution to this crisis is the publication format Registered Reports (RRs). Here, authors submit the frontend of their paper for peer review before data collection. While this format can help increase the trustworthiness of research, authors’ usage of RRs—although emerging—has been scarce and scattered. Eventually, common beliefs regarding the (dis)advantages of RRs and a lack of best practices can limit the broad implementation of this approach. To address these issues, we utilized a systematic review process to identify 50 RRs in management and applied psychology and surveyed authors with (N = 86) and without experience (N = 161) in publishing RRs and reviewers/editors who have handled RRs (N = 59). On this basis, we (a) scrutinize prevalent beliefs surrounding the RR format in the fields of management and applied psychology and (b) derive hands-on best practices. In sum, we provide a fact check and guidelines for authors interested in writing RRs, which can also be used by reviewers to evaluate such submissions.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)588-620
Number of pages33
JournalOrganizational Research Methods
Volume27
Issue number4
Early online date7 Nov 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2024

Keywords

  • open science
  • pre-registration
  • registered reports

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Publishing Registered Reports in Management and Applied Psychology: Common Beliefs and Best Practices'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this