NSF PD 19-125Y - Science of Science: Discovery, Communication, and Impact (SoS:DCI) -Randomized Control Trial of the Registered Reports Publishing Format

注册报告（RR）出版模式可以改变研究的实施、同行评审和出版方式。rr可能会改变研究人员的动机，使他们更专注于提出重要的问题，并使用强有力的方法来检验这些问题，而不是对令人兴奋的、具有挑衅性的结果（无论其可信度如何）的要求。最终，rrr可以提高同行评审和学术交流的质量，从而提高研究的严谨性、透明度和可重复性。大规模采用rs可以从根本上改变研究的评估和交流方式。在RR中，作者提交一篇论文，详细说明研究问题，并提出在观察研究结果之前测试问题的方法。在同行评议的第一阶段，评议者评估问题的重要性和所提出的研究方法的质量。如果论文通过了这一阶段的同行评议，作者将获得“原则上的接受”，这意味着，只要作者按照规定执行和报告研究，无论结果如何，期刊都承诺发表这篇论文。同行评议的第二阶段，在结果已知并添加到论文中之后，评估对原始承诺的遵守，计划分析和非计划分析之间的区别的清晰度，以及对发现的解释的准确性，而不是结果是否积极，有趣或与假设一致。考虑到rrr对研究过程的潜在变革性影响，有必要进行随机试验来评估模型的质量。通过与期刊合作，我们将在生态有效的背景下进行rrr的随机试验。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

The Registered Reports (RR) publishing model could be transformative to how research is conducted, peer reviewed, and published. RRs could alter incentives for researchers toward focusing on asking important questions and using strong methodology to test those questions, and away from the demand for exciting, provocative results whatever their credibility. Ultimately, RRs can improve the quality of peer review and scholarly communication, thus improving the rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of research. Large-scale adoption of RRs could fundamentally change how research is evaluated and communicated.In a RR, authors submit a paper detailing the research question and proposed methodology to test the question prior to observing the study outcomes. In the first stage of peer review, reviewers assess the importance of the question and the quality of the methodology proposed to investigate it. If the paper passes this stage of peer review, the authors receive “in-principle acceptance” meaning that the journal commits to publishing the paper regardless of outcomes as long as the authors follow through with competent execution and reporting of the research. The second stage of peer review, after the results are known and added to the paper, assesses adherence to the original commitments, clarity of the distinction between planned and unplanned analyses, and accuracy of interpretation of findings, and not whether the results are positive, interesting, or consistent with hypotheses. Given the potentially transformative impact of RRs on the research process, it is essential to conduct a randomized trial to evaluate the model’s qualities. By collaborating with journals, we will conduct a randomized trial of RRs in an ecologically valid context.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.