Instructions for Proposing a Replication Report, Carrying out the Project, Joining a Replication in Progress, and Writing It Up
Perspectives is seeking high-quality replications of important already-published results. Because we want to involve the original authors in the process, incorporate independently conducted replications from multiple research teams, and publish the results regardless of outcome, the process for proposing topics and submitting articles is different from the standard peer-review process.
1.Get Approval for the Choice of Experiment to be Replicated
Authors must first submit a Pre-Submission Inquiry Form in which they identify the article and study that would be replicated and justify why that study has high replication value. We receive many pre-proposals, and can move forward only with those with the highest replication value that are feasible for this multi-lab approach. Replication value and suitability of a study for an RRR reflects whether:
(a) The study has been influential in the field
(b) The study is methodologically sound and the interpretation of the result unambiguous
(c) The study forces a reconsideration of an important theory or establishes the foundation for a theoretical position
(d) The study has not yet been the subject of published replications, or those replications have yielded inconsistent results
(e) There is reason for substantial uncertainty about the size of the effect
(f) Theories of or empirical understanding of the effect would benefit from a more precise estimate of the effect’s size
(g) Other labs likely would want to join the replication effort
Submit the completed pre-submission inquiry form through the Perspectives submission portal as a Registered Replication Proposal. Step-by-step instructions for completing the submission can be found here.
2. Complete a Replication Proposal & Review Form
Once the pre-submission inquiry has been approved, authors should complete the Replication Proposal & Review Form. In this detailed form, the proposers will describe the specifics of both the original study and the proposed replication study. The form will help the proposers, original authors, and editors identify and discuss any important discrepancies, and it will serve as the basis of the published protocol. Reviewers (including original authors) will use the form to provide feedback about the design, correct any mistakes in the description of the original study, provide missing information, and identify necessary manipulation checks. The goal is to make sure the replication attempt matches the original study as closely as possible and to identify all deviations from the original study protocol.
Submit the completed proposal form as a revision of your pre-submission inquiry. Do not complete or submit this form unless a Pre-Submission Inquiry Form has been accepted by the editors.
Once the full proposal form has been vetted and accepted, the editors will produce a protocol description that will be posted on the APS website and on Open Science Framework for other researchers to follow. Other laboratories will be invited to follow the protocol exactly in conducting their own replications. These additional laboratories should be sure to check whether the replication project is still open to new labs. If so, they will submit a simplified Application to Participate documenting how they will adhere to the approved protocol. These submissions will be vetted by the editors and by additional reviewers as needed. The posted protocol will state a deadline for such additional submissions and a final deadline for completion of all replication studies. All participating researchers commit to publishing the results of their replications in Perspectives on Psychological Science, regardless of the outcome.
As protocols become available, you will be able to view them and download an Application to Participate.
Once data have been collected, each replicating team will write a summary of their method and results for inclusion in the final registered replication report. These will be collected by the editors to form a single publishable paper. The researchers who originally proposed the registered replication report will be listed as the first authors, and additional replicators will be listed after them (the default will be alphabetical order). Moreover, each research team will be identified by name alongside their method and results descriptions. Finally, each set of results will be linked to the data from the study and optional further discussions on a dedicated set of pages on the Open Science Framework. The printed registered replication report will be open access, meaning that it will be freely available to anyone.