SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Evaluating Registered Reports: A Naturalistic Comparative Study of Article Impact
16 references·10 citing·39 second hop
Evaluating Registered Reports: A Naturalistic Comparative Study of Article Impact (2017)Evaluating Registered Reports: A Naturali…The preregistration revolution (2018)The preregistration revolutionEvaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics (2016)Evaluating replicability of l…Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)Estimating the reproducibilit…Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer (2014)Publication bias in the socia…Investigating Variation in Replicability (2014)Investigating Variation in Re…Scientific Utopia (2012)Scientific UtopiaAn Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research (2012)An Agenda for Purely Confirma…False-Positive Psychology (2011)False-Positive PsychologyBelieve it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets? (2011)Believe it or not: how much c…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research F…Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)Why the impact factor of jour…Publication bias in clinical research (1991)Publication bias in clinical …The Existence of Publication Bias and Risk Factors for Its Occurrence (1990)The Existence of Publication …The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)The file drawer problem and t…Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system (1977)Publication prejudices: An ex…Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis. (1975)Consequences of prejudice aga…Open Science: A Review of Its Effectiveness and Implications for Service Research (2025)Open Science: A Review of Its…Incentives and the replication crisis in social sciences: A critical review of open science practices (2024)Incentives and the replicatio…The Chinese Open Science Network (COSN): Building an Open Science Community From Scratch (2023)The Chinese Open Science Netw…Editorial Perspective: Misaligned incentives in mental health research – the case for Registered Reports (2023)Editorial Perspective: Misali…What senior academics can do to support reproducible and open research: a short, three-step guide (2022)What senior academics can do …Published registered reports are rare, limited to one journal group and inadequate for randomized controlled trials in the clinical field (2022)Published registered reports …Reshaping the publication process: Addiction Research and Theory joins Peer Community In Registered Reports (2021)Reshaping the publication pro…Improving norms in research culture to incentivize transparency and rigor (2021)Improving norms in research c…A qualitative analysis of stakeholder experiences with Registered Reports Funding Partnerships (2021)A qualitative analysis of sta…Protocol transparency is vital for registered reports (2018)Protocol transparency is vita…Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package (2010)Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs (2013)Estimating Psychological Networks and their Accuracy: A Tutorial Paper (2016)Redefine statistical significance (2017)A tutorial on regularized partial correlation networks. (2018)Meta-analysis in social research (1982)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)The Generalizability of Survey Experiments (2015)The natural selection of bad science (2016)A New Paradigm for Systematic Literature Reviews in Supply Chain Management (2017)Artifact in behavioral research (1969)The Handbook of Social Psychology (1969)Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel‐Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis (2000)Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation (1972)Chance and Consensus in Peer Review (1981)Publishing by—and for?—the Numbers (1990)A review of theory and practice in scientometrics (2015)Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics (2015)A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2016)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)Biased evaluation and persistence in gambling. (1983)The case for motivated reasoning. (1990)The New Statistics (2013)Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (1975)Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011)Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Samples and Settings (2018)Replicability, Robustness, and Reproducibility in Psychological Science (2021)Publication bias in meta-analysis its causes and consequences (2000)A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta‐analysis (2001)How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study (2003)Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis (2014)The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015 (2018)A Nonparametric "Trim and Fill" Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis (2000)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials (2001)A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. (2006)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False10,471 cited
  • 1979The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.9,043 cited
  • 2015Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science8,516 cited
  • 2011False-Positive Psychology6,561 cited
  • 1991Publication bias in clinical research3,110 cited
  • 1997Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research2,444 cited
  • 2018The preregistration revolution1,972 cited
  • 2011Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets?1,885 cited
  • 2014Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer1,539 cited
  • 1990The Existence of Publication Bias and Risk Factors for Its Occurrence1,413 cited
  • 2016Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics1,314 cited
  • 2012Scientific Utopia1,301 cited
  • 2014Investigating Variation in Replicability1,207 cited
  • 2012An Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research1,041 cited
  • 1975Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis.1,022 cited
  • 1977Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

1,013 cited

Cited by

  • 2021Improving norms in research culture to incentivize transparency and rigor35 cited
  • 2018Protocol transparency is vital for registered reports20 cited
  • 2024Incentives and the replication crisis in social sciences: A critical review of open science practices17 cited
  • 2025Open Science: A Review of Its Effectiveness and Implications for Service Research17 cited
  • 2022What senior academics can do to support reproducible and open research: a short, three-step guide16 cited
  • 2023The Chinese Open Science Network (COSN): Building an Open Science Community From Scratch14 cited
  • 2021A qualitative analysis of stakeholder experiences with Registered Reports Funding Partnerships14 cited
  • 2021Reshaping the publication process: Addiction Research and Theory joins Peer Community In Registered Reports9 cited
  • 2023Editorial Perspective: Misaligned incentives in mental health research – the case for Registered Reports7 cited
  • 2022Published registered reports are rare, limited to one journal group and inadequate for randomized controlled trials in the clinical field6 cited