Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T06:31:19.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preregistration of Studies and Mock Reports

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Andrew Gelman
Andrew Gelman*
Affiliation:
Departments of Statistics and Political Science, Columbia University, Amsterdam Ave. at 122 St., New York, NY 10027 e-mail: gelman@stat.columbia.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The traditional system of scientific and scholarly publishing is breaking down in two different directions.

Type
Symposium on Research Registration
Information
Political Analysis , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , Winter 2013 , pp. 40 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gelman, A., and Stern, H. S. 2006. The difference between “significant” and “not significant” is not itself statistically significant. American Statistician 60: 328–31.Google Scholar
Gelman, A., and Tuerlinckx, F. 2000. Type S error rates for classical and Bayesian single and multiple comparison procedures. Computational Statistics 15: 373–90.Google Scholar
Humphreys, Macartan, Sanchez de la Sierra, Raul, and van der Windt, Peter. 2013. Fishing, commitment, and communication: A proposal for comprehensive nonbinding research registration. Political Analysis 21: 1–20.Google Scholar
Ioannidis, J. P. A. 2005. Why most published research findings are false. Public Library of Science. Medicine 2: e124.Google Scholar
Monogan, James E. III. 2013. A case for registering studies of political outcomes: An application in the 2010 House elections. Political Analysis 21: 21–37.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, R. 1979. The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin 86: 638–41.Google Scholar
Vul, E., Harris, C., Winkielman, P., and Pashler, H. 2009. Puzzlingly high correlations in fMRI studies of emotion, personality, and social cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science 4: 274–90.Google Scholar