> such as at Perspectives on Psychological Science or Cognition & Emotion, whereas RR refers to Registered Reports more >
-
-
> broadly, which in almost all cases is offered for both replications & original studies. We curate a list of journals &>
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
> specific policies here: https://osf.io/8mpji/wiki/2.%20Journal%20Comparison/?_ga=1.76143125.121950508.1455488325 … See columns 4 & 5 for wheth RRs are offered for only reps (i.e. RRRs) >
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
> or wheth they are offered for both (RRs). And occasionally, some journals only accept RRs for orig studies (not reps).
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
-
JEP:General and Cortex seem useful ones to keep in mind for replications, as well as RSOS like you said.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes defo. I edit RRs at Cortex & RSOS so if u ever want to discuss a poss subm informally, don't hesitate to email me.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chrisdc77 @PaulEDux
I most definitely will especially since reading though (just RSOS) the bits on RRs are very empirically oriented. So in
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
my case I probably would need to discuss what and how for a comp model in further detail.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Agree. Would be an interesting challenge - I'm sure it is compatible in principle.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Thanks so much again, this really has been a most constructive and explanatory take on RRs I've ever seen. Outlining
-
-
the incentives for doing it has been really useful to me.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.