IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i4d10.1007_s11192-023-04896-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Registered report adoption in academic journals: assessing rates in different research domains

Author

Listed:
  • Ting-Yu Lin

    (National Taiwan Normal University)

  • Hao-Chien Cheng

    (National Taiwan Normal University)

  • Li-Fu Cheng

    (National Taiwan Normal University)

  • Tsung-Min Hung

    (National Taiwan Normal University)

Abstract

Although the number of journals that have adopted the registered report format has increased rapidly in recent years, they still account for only a tiny portion of academic journals. This article provides a summary and overview of the number and proportion of journals that accept the registered report format in the various scientific domains. The Center for Open Science was searched for journals that have adopted the registered report as a regular submission option. The numbers of such journals in each scientific domain were then counted based on their group and category classification in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). In July 2023, 278 journals had adopted the registered report format, with 186 of these journals included in the JCR. The percentage of journals that had adopted the registered report format ranged from 0 to 7% across the different major research fields (groups in JCR) and from 0 to 34% across the research subfields (categories in JCR). The group “Psychiatry/Psychology” and category “Psychology, Experimental” had the highest percentage of journals that had adopted registered reports. Four large-scale replication projects have been published, focusing on psychology, social science, medicine, and economics, respectively. Although all four studies showed unsatisfactory replication success rates, ≤ 1% of the journals in the corresponding scientific domains had adopted registered reports, with the exception of psychology (7%). To improve research reliability and transparency, it is critical to increase the use of the registered report publishing format.

Suggested Citation

  • Ting-Yu Lin & Hao-Chien Cheng & Li-Fu Cheng & Tsung-Min Hung, 2024. "Registered report adoption in academic journals: assessing rates in different research domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2123-2130, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04896-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-023-04896-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-023-04896-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-023-04896-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tom E. Hardwicke & John P. A. Ioannidis, 2018. "Mapping the universe of registered reports," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(11), pages 793-796, November.
    2. Camerer, Colin & Dreber, Anna & Forsell, Eskil & Ho, Teck-Hua & Huber, Jurgen & Johannesson, Magnus & Kirchler, Michael & Almenberg, Johan & Altmejd, Adam & Chan, Taizan & Heikensten, Emma & Holzmeist, 2016. "Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in Economics," MPRA Paper 75461, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Courtney K. Soderberg & Timothy M. Errington & Sarah R. Schiavone & Julia Bottesini & Felix Singleton Thorn & Simine Vazire & Kevin M. Esterling & Brian A. Nosek, 2021. "Initial evidence of research quality of registered reports compared with the standard publishing model," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 990-997, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Balafoutas, Loukas & Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Umashev, Nicholas, 2025. "Incentives and the replication crisis in social sciences: A critical review of open science practices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Felix Holzmeister & Magnus Johannesson & Colin F. Camerer & Yiling Chen & Teck-Hua Ho & Suzanne Hoogeveen & Juergen Huber & Noriko Imai & Taisuke Imai & Lawrence Jin & Michael Kirchler & Alexander Ly , 2025. "Examining the replicability of online experiments selected by a decision market," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 316-330, February.
    2. Shaw, Steven D. & Nave, Gideon, 2023. "Don't hate the player, hate the game: Realigning incentive structures to promote robust science and better scientific practices in marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    3. Balafoutas, Loukas & Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Umashev, Nicholas, 2025. "Incentives and the replication crisis in social sciences: A critical review of open science practices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Adler, Susanne Jana & Röseler, Lukas & Schöniger, Martina Katharina, 2023. "A toolbox to evaluate the trustworthiness of published findings," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    5. Alexander Frankel & Maximilian Kasy, 2022. "Which Findings Should Be Published?," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-38, February.
    6. Alexandru Marcoci & David P. Wilkinson & Ans Vercammen & Bonnie C. Wintle & Anna Lou Abatayo & Ernest Baskin & Henk Berkman & Erin M. Buchanan & Sara Capitán & Tabaré Capitán & Ginny Chan & Kent Jason, 2025. "Predicting the replicability of social and behavioural science claims in COVID-19 preprints," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 287-304, February.
    7. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List & Claire Mackevicius & Min Sok Lee & Dana Suskind, 2019. "How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling," Artefactual Field Experiments 00679, The Field Experiments Website.
    8. Tom Coupé & W. Robert Reed, 2021. "Do Negative Replications Affect Citations?," Working Papers in Economics 21/14, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    9. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick, 2018. "Open access to research data: Strategic delay and the ambiguous welfare effects of mandatory data disclosure," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 20-34.
    10. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    11. Nick Huntington‐Klein & Andreu Arenas & Emily Beam & Marco Bertoni & Jeffrey R. Bloem & Pralhad Burli & Naibin Chen & Paul Grieco & Godwin Ekpe & Todd Pugatch & Martin Saavedra & Yaniv Stopnitzky, 2021. "The influence of hidden researcher decisions in applied microeconomics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 944-960, July.
    12. Spyros Galanis & Christos A Ioannou & Stelios Kotronis, 2024. "Information Aggregation Under Ambiguity: Theory and Experimental Evidence," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(6), pages 3423-3467.
    13. Cloos, Janis & Greiff, Matthias & Rusch, Hannes, 2020. "Geographical Concentration and Editorial Favoritism within the Field of Laboratory Experimental Economics (RM/19/029-revised-)," Research Memorandum 014, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    14. Doucouliagos, Hristos & Paldam, Martin & Stanley, T.D., 2018. "Skating on thin evidence: Implications for public policy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 16-25.
    15. Mark Anderson, D. & Sabia, Joseph J. & Tekin, Erdal, 2021. "Child access prevention laws and juvenile firearm-related homicides," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    16. Rutledge, Robert M. & Alladi, Vinayak & Cheung, Stephen L., 2025. "Price expectations and reference-dependent preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    17. Sebastian Gechert & Bianka Mey & Matej Opatrny & Tomas Havranek & T. D. Stanley & Pedro R. D. Bom & Hristos Doucouliagos & Philipp Heimberger & Zuzana Irsova & Heiko J. Rachinger, 2025. "Conventional wisdom, meta‐analysis, and research revision in economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 980-999, July.
    18. Kai Ruggeri & Amma Panin & Milica Vdovic & Bojana Većkalov & Nazeer Abdul-Salaam & Jascha Achterberg & Carla Akil & Jolly Amatya & Kanchan Amatya & Thomas Lind Andersen & Sibele D. Aquino & Arjoon Aru, 2022. "The globalizability of temporal discounting," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(10), pages 1386-1397, October.
    19. Lucas C. Coffman & Muriel Niederle & Alistair J. Wilson, 2017. "A Proposal to Organize and Promote Replications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 41-45, May.
    20. Bigoni, Maria & Camera, Gabriele & Casari, Marco, 2020. "Money is more than memory," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 99-115.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04896-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.