Pre-registration as behaviour: developing an evidence-based intervention specification to increase pre-registration uptake by researchers using the Behaviour Change Wheel

References

• Ayris, P., López de San Román, A., Maes, K., & Labastida, I. (2018). Open science and its role in universities: A roadmap for cultural change. Leuven: LERU Office. Retrieved February, 20, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature, 533(26), 353–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakker, M., Veldkamp, C. L., van Assen, M. A., Crompvoets, E. A., Ong, H. H., Nosek, B. A., Wicherts, J. M., Wicherts, J. M., & Soderberg, C. K. (2020). Ensuring the quality and specificity of preregistrations. PLoS Biology, 18(12), e3000937. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000937
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker, H. S. (1998). Tricks of the trade. University of Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Bishop, D. V. (2020). The psychology of experimental psychologists: Overcoming cognitive constraints to improve research: The 47th Sir Frederic Bartlett Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819886519
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2019). Thematic analysis. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in health social sciences. Springer. 843–860 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, D. (2021). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56, 1391–1412. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
   Google Scholar
• Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Forsell, E., Ho, T. H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., Kirchler, M., Almenberg, J., Altmejd, A., Chan, T., Heikensten, E., Holzmeister, F., Imai, T., Isaksson, S., Nave, G., Pfeiffer, T., Razen, M., & Wu, H. (2016). Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics. Science, 351(6280), 1433–1436. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf0918
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, C. D., Dienes, Z., McIntosh, R. D., Rotshtein, P., & Willmes, K. (2015). Registered reports: Realigning incentives in scientific publishing. Cortex, 66, A1–A2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, C. D., & Tzavella, L. (2022). The past, present and future of registered reports. Nature Human Behaviour, 6 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01193-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, P., Dieppe, P., Macintyre, S., Michie, S., Nazareth, I., & Petticrew, M. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new medical research council guidance. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 337:a1655. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1655
   Google Scholar
• Crüwell, S., van Doorn, J., Etz, A., Makel, M. C., Moshontz, H., Niebaum, J. C., Orben, A., Parsons, S., & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2019). Seven easy steps to open science. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 227(4), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000387
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, R., Campbell, R., Hildon, Z., Hobbs, L., & Michie, S. (2015). Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: A scoping review. Health Psychology Review, 9(3), 323–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2014.941722
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dienlin, T., Johannes, N., Bowman, N. D., Masur, P. K., Engesser, S., Kümpel, A. S., Lukito, J., Bier, L. M., Zhang, R., Johnson, B. K., Huskey, R., Schneider, F. M., Breuer, J., Parry, D. A., Vermeulen, I., Fisher, J. T., Banks, J., Weber, R., Ellis, D. A., … De Vreese, C. (2021). An agenda for open science in communication. Journal of Communication, 71(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, M. A., & Roy, S. (2017). Academic research in the 21st century: Maintaining scientific integrity in a climate of perverse incentives and hypercompetition. Environmental Engineering Science, 34(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1089/ees.2016.0223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2018). Cost-benefit analysis for FAIR research data: Cost of not having FAIR research data. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/02999
   Google Scholar
• Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hardwicke, T. E., Thibault, R. T., Kosie, J., Wallach, J. D., Kidwell, M. C., & Ioannidis, J. (2021). Estimating the prevalence of transparency and reproducibility-related research practices in psychology (2014-2017). Perspectives on Psychological Science. 17(1), 239-251. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F1745691620979806
   Google Scholar
• Higginson, A. D., & Munafò, M. R. (2016). Current incentives for scientists lead to underpowered studies with erroneous conclusions. PLOS Biology, 14(11), e2000995. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2000995
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, R. M., Irvin, V. L., & Garattini, S. (2015). Likelihood of null effects of large NHLBI clinical trials has increased over time. PloS one, 10(8), e0132382. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132382
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kathawalla, U. K., Silverstein, P., & Syed, M. (2021). Easing into open science: A guide for graduate students and their advisors. Collabra: Psychology, 7(1), 18684. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.18684
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kidwell, M. C., Lazarević, L. B., Baranski, E., Hardwicke, T. E., Piechowski, S., Falkenberg, L. S., Nosek, B. A., Sonnleitner, C., Hess-Holden, C., Errington, T. M., Fiedler, S., Nosek, B. A., & Kennett, C. (2016). Badges to acknowledge open research practices: A simple, low-cost, effective method for increasing transparency. PLoS Biology, 14(5), e1002456. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002456
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein O et al . (2018). A Practical Guide for Transparency in Psychological Science. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 10.1525/collabra.15810.1525/collabra.158.pr
   Google Scholar
• Lindsay, D. S., Simons, D. J., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2016). Research preregistration 101. APS Observer, 29(10), 23–25. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/research-preregistration-101
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marques, M. M., Carey, R. N., Norris, E., Evans, F., Finnerty, A. N., Hastings, J., Jenkins, E., Johnston, M., West, R., & Michie, S. (2021). Delivering behaviour change interventions: development of a mode of delivery ontology [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. Wellcome Open Res, 5(125), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15906.2
   Google Scholar
• Michie, S., Atkins, L., & West, R. (2014). The Behaviour Change Wheel: A guide to designing interventions. Silverback Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Michie, S., Richardson, M., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., … Wood, C. E. (2013). The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: Building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 46(1), 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science, 6(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munafò, M. R., Chambers, C., Collins, A., Fortunato, L., & Macleod, M. (2022). The reproducibility debate is an opportunity, not a crisis. BMC Research Notes, 15(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-05942-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., du Sert, N. P., Simonsohn, U., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ware, J. J., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(1), 0021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Reproducibility and replicability in science. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25303
   Google Scholar
• Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
   Google Scholar
• Norris, E., He, Y., Loh, R., West, R., & Michie, S. (2021). Assessing markers of reproducibility and transparency in smoking behaviour change intervention evaluations. Journal of Smoking Cessation, 2021, 6694386. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6694386
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, E., Marques M. M., Finnerty A. N., et al. (2020). Development of an Intervention Setting Ontology for behaviour change: Specifying where interventions take place [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. Wellcome Open Res, 5(124), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15904.1
   Google Scholar
• Norris, E., & O’Connor, D. B. (2019). Science as behaviour: Using a behaviour change approach to increase uptake of open science. Psychology & Health, 12(34), 1397–1406. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2019.1679373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, E., Wright, A. J., Hastings, J. et al. (2021). Specifying who delivers behaviour change interventions: development of an Intervention Source Ontology [version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. Wellcome Open Res, 6(77), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16682.1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nosek, B. A., Ebersole, C. R., DeHaven, A. C., & Mellor, D. T. (2018). The preregistration revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(11), 2600–2606. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708274114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nosek, B. A., Spies, J. R., & Motyl, M. (2012). Scientific utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 615–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612459058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor, D. B. (2021). Leonardo da Vinci, preregistration and the architecture of science: Towards a more open and transparent research culture. Health Psychology Bulletin, 5(1), 39–45. http://doi.org/10.5334/hpb.30
   Google Scholar
• Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716-1–aac4716-8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, U. (2022). What is the function of confirmation bias? Erkenntnis, 87 (3)1351–1376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-020-00252-1
   Google Scholar
• Rattray, J., & Jones, M. C. (2007). Essential elements of questionnaire design and development. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 16(2), 234–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01573.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarafoglou, A., Kovacs, M., Bakos, B. E., Wagenmakers, E. J., & Aczel, B. (2021). A survey on how preregistration affects the research workflow: Better science but more work. https://psyarxiv.com/6k5gr/
   Google Scholar
• Schimmack, U. (2020). A meta-psychological perspective on the decade of replication failures in social psychology. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 61(4), 364. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, S. (2009). Shall we really do it again? The powerful concept of replication is neglected in the social sciences. Review of General Psychology, 13(2), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, B., Gemeinholzer, B., Treloar, A., & Guralnick, R. (2016). Open data in global environmental research: The Belmont Forum’s open data survey. PloS one, 11(1), e0146695. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146695
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serghiou, S., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., Boyack, K. W., Riedel, N., Wallach, J. D., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2021). Assessment of transparency indicators across the biomedical literature: How open is open? PLoS Biology, 19(3), e3001107. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, S., Rinke, E. M., McGarrigle, R., Lynott, D., Lunny, C., Lautarescu, A., … Crook, Z. (2020). Pre-registration and registered reports: A primer from UKRN. from https://osf.io/8v2n7/download?format=pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan, I., DeHaven, A., & Mellor, D. (2019). Open and reproducible research on open science framework. Current Protocols Essential Laboratory Techniques, 18(1), e32. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpet.32
   Google Scholar
• Szollosi, A., Kellen, D., Navarro, D., Shiffrin, R., van Rooij, I., Van Zandt, T., & Donkin, C. (2020). Is preregistration worthwhile? 24(2), 94-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.11.009
   Google Scholar
• West, R., Michie, S., Atkins, L., Chadwick, P., & Lorencatto, F. (2019). Achieving behaviour change: A guide for local government and partners. Public Health England. from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/875385/PHEBI_Achieving_Behaviour_Change_Local_Government.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wicherts, J. M., Veldkamp, C. L., Augusteijn, H. E., Bakker, M., Van Aert, R., & Van Assen, M. A. (2016). Degrees of freedom in planning, running, analyzing, and reporting psychological studies: A checklist to avoid p-hacking. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1832. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01832
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J.-W., da Silva Santos, L. B., Bourne, P. E., Bouwman, J., Brookes, A. J., Clark, T., Crosas, M., Dillo, I., Dumon, O., Edmunds, S., Evelo, C. T., Finkers, R., … Mons, B. (2016). The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data, 3(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, A. (2003). How to … Write and analyse a questionnaire. Journal of Orthodontics, 30(3), 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/30.3.245
   PubMedGoogle Scholar