Scholarlink

<p>Preregistration is designed as a solution to questionable research practices, safeguarding the epistemic integrity of scientific work. Despite its benefits, concerns remain that it might inadvertently suppress creativity and exploration, diminishing epistemic diversity. To engage with this debate, I employ an agent-based model to analyze how different preregistration regimes influence scientific communities. I argue that the coexistence of different research types is heavily dependent on the existing reward structures in academia, rather than on preregistration itself. Interestingly, I find that universally mandatory preregistration, compared to mere incentivization, promotes a more balanced coexistence of research methodologies, contingent upon how rewards are distributed between confirmatory and exploratory research. In light of arguments and results, I propose practical improvements for implementing preregistration, including a two-tier publication system for exploratory research and the adoption of registered reports. This approach aims to foster an environment where both diversity and integrity can thrive, addressing the underlying institutional biases.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Preregistration is not a ceiling: but it can become one

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月12日

查看全文
  • Luca Garzino Demo

摘要

Preregistration is designed as a solution to questionable research practices, safeguarding the epistemic integrity of scientific work. Despite its benefits, concerns remain that it might inadvertently suppress creativity and exploration, diminishing epistemic diversity. To engage with this debate, I employ an agent-based model to analyze how different preregistration regimes influence scientific communities. I argue that the coexistence of different research types is heavily dependent on the existing reward structures in academia, rather than on preregistration itself. Interestingly, I find that universally mandatory preregistration, compared to mere incentivization, promotes a more balanced coexistence of research methodologies, contingent upon how rewards are distributed between confirmatory and exploratory research. In light of arguments and results, I propose practical improvements for implementing preregistration, including a two-tier publication system for exploratory research and the adoption of registered reports. This approach aims to foster an environment where both diversity and integrity can thrive, addressing the underlying institutional biases.