Clayson Peter E, Carbine Kaylie A, Shuford John L, McDonald Julia B, Larson Michael J
Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Department of Psychology, California State University - Dominguez Hills, Carson, CA, USA.
Cortex. 2025 Apr;185:253-269. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2025.02.008. Epub 2025 Feb 27.
Common explanations for replication failures in neuroscience and psychophysiology include the exploitation of researcher degrees of freedom and ambiguous or inappropriate methodology, creating an environment in which flexibility during data processing and analysis could increase the probability of erroneous or irreplicable findings. The present registered report described preregistration practices in EEG/ERP studies, quantified adherence to preregistration, and estimated expected replication/discovery rates. Out of 506 preregistrations and 25 registered reports screened, 385 met eligibility. The EEG/ERP preregistrations resulted in 92 published manuscripts. For the preregistered studies, 57-99% included the minimal necessary methodological detail for replication. Adherence to preregistration in the 92 published studies averaged 60%. Exploratory analyses indicated that registered reports had the highest average adherence (92%), followed by articles explicitly mentioning preregistration (60%), and then by those not mentioning preregistration (39%). Only 16% of published studies fully adhered to preregistered plans or disclosed all deviations. Preregistered studies reported more methodological details (64% vs. 61%) and more frequently justified sample sizes and data exclusion than companion non-preregistered studies. A z-curve analysis indicated that selective reporting was likely present in published preregistered studies. Although preregistration can enhance transparency and reduce researcher bias in EEG/ERP research, current practices fall short. Ambiguity in preregistrations and inconsistent adherence undermine utility of preregistration. Moving forward, researchers should prioritize clarity and accessibility in preregistrations, and journals should implement policies to ensure the review of preregistration adherence.
神经科学和心理生理学中复制失败的常见解释包括研究人员自由度的利用以及方法的模糊或不恰当,从而营造了一种数据处理和分析过程中的灵活性可能增加错误或不可复制结果概率的环境。本注册报告描述了脑电图/事件相关电位(EEG/ERP)研究中的预注册实践,量化了对预注册的遵守情况,并估计了预期的复制/发现率。在筛选的506份预注册和25份注册报告中,385份符合资格。EEG/ERP预注册产生了92篇已发表的手稿。对于预注册的研究,57%-99%包含了复制所需的最少方法细节。在92篇已发表的研究中,对预注册的平均遵守率为60%。探索性分析表明,注册报告的平均遵守率最高(92%),其次是明确提及预注册的文章(60%),然后是未提及预注册的文章(39%)。只有16%的已发表研究完全遵守预注册计划或披露了所有偏差。与未预注册的对照研究相比,预注册研究报告了更多的方法细节(64%对61%),并且更频繁地说明了样本量和数据排除的理由。z曲线分析表明,已发表的预注册研究中可能存在选择性报告。虽然预注册可以提高脑电图/事件相关电位研究的透明度并减少研究人员偏差,但目前的实践仍有不足。预注册中的模糊性和不一致的遵守情况破坏了预注册的效用。展望未来,研究人员应在预注册中优先考虑清晰度和可及性,期刊应实施政策以确保对预注册遵守情况的审查。