Making ERP research more transparent: Guidelines for preregistration

被引:37
作者
Paul, Mariella [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Govaart, Gisela H. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Schettino, Antonio [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Max Planck Inst Human Cognit & Brain Sci, Dept Neuropsychol, Stephanstr 1a, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany
[2] Humboldt Univ, Fac Philosophy, Berlin Sch Mind & Brain, Luisenstr 56, D-10117 Berlin, Germany
[3] Univ Gottingen, Psychol Language Dept, Gosslerstr 14, D-37073 Gottingen, Germany
[4] Charite Univ Med Berlin, Einstein Ctr Neurosci Berlin, D-10117 Berlin, Germany
[5] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Res Serv, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, NL-3062 PA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[6] Inst Globally Distributed Open Res & Educ IGDORE, Stockholm, Sweden
关键词
EEG; ERP; Open science; Preregistration; RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIALS; ERROR-RELATED NEGATIVITY; INDEPENDENT COMPONENTS; PROCESSING PIPELINE; EEG-DATA; PUBLICATION; POTENTIALS; INCENTIVES; NULL; MEG;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.02.016
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
A combination of confirmation bias, hindsight bias, and pressure to publish may prompt the (unconscious) exploration of various methodological options and reporting only the ones that lead to a (statistically) significant outcome. This undisclosed analytic flexibility is particularly relevant in EEG research, where a myriad of preprocessing and analysis pipelines can be used to extract information from complex multidimensional data. One solution to limit confirmation and hindsight bias by disclosing analytic choices is preregistration: researchers write a time-stamped, publicly accessible research plan with hypotheses, data collection plan, and the intended preprocessing and statistical analyses before the start of a research project. In this manuscript, we present an overview of the problems associated with undisclosed analytic flexibility, discuss why and how EEG researchers would benefit from adopting preregistration, provide guidelines and examples on how to preregister data preprocessing and analysis steps in typical ERP studies, and conclude by discussing possibilities and limitations of this open science practice.
引用
收藏
页码:52 / 63
页数:12
相关论文
共 208 条
[1]   P-hacking in clinical trials and how incentives shape the distribution of results across phases [J].
Adda, Jerome ;
Decker, Christian ;
Ottaviani, Marco .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2020, 117 (24) :13386-13392
[2]   When power analyses based on pilot data are biased: Inaccurate effect size estimators and follow-up bias [J].
Albers, Casper ;
Lakens, Daniel .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 74 :187-195
[3]   How much baseline correction do we need in ERP research? Extended GLM model can replace baseline correction while lifting its limits [J].
Alday, Phillip M. .
PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 2019, 56 (12)
[4]  
Algermissen J., 2019, ORGAN HUM BRAIN MAPP
[5]   Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond [J].
Allen, Christopher ;
Mehler, David M. A. .
PLOS BIOLOGY, 2019, 17 (05)
[6]   Registration and design alterations of clinical trials in critical care: a cross-sectional observational study [J].
Anand, Vijay ;
Scales, Damon C. ;
Parshuram, Christopher S. ;
Kavanagh, Brian P. .
INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE, 2014, 40 (05) :700-722
[7]   In praise of replication studies [J].
不详 .
NATURE, 2020, 578 (7796) :489-490
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2017, NATURE, V551, P414, DOI 10.1038/d41586-017-07325-2
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2016, FRONT HUM NEUROSCI, DOI DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00713
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2017, DATA ANAL MODEL COMP, DOI DOI 10.4324/9781315744131