In cases in which results (whether present or not) may have important theoretical or practical implications, scholars are encouraged to follow a Registered Report submission approach.
This is a permanent open call. For more information, click here.
In cases in which results, whether present or not, may have important theoretical or practical implications, scholars are encouraged to submit a Registered Report. In this type of submission, authors submit the introduction, methods, measurement info, and analysis plan (but not the results) of a completed or planned study. This abbreviated paper is then evaluated on the basis of the importance of the topic, the merit of the selected analytic approach, methodological rigor and quality, and potential for impacting down-the-road theorizing and/or practice/policy. As results are not included in the registered report, what was or is likely to be found has no bearing on the outcome of the evaluation. This is in line with AMD’s willingness to publish papers reporting negligible or non-effects (see Miller & Bamberger, 2016).
Using this results-blind approach, our aim is to have authors submit interesting, important, empirically grounded studies meeting AMD’s standards for methodological rigor, but without concern for the direction or statistical significance of the findings. With the focus on the research question, potential implications, and rigor, the study is evaluated regardless of whether the findings are supportive (or not) of some a priori hunch, replicate or question prior findings, or demonstrate evidence (or not) of some treatment effect. Such reports can be especially useful when conducting audit studies, which are typically used to capture and assess discrimination (see for example Ameri, Rogers, Schur, & Kruse, 2020).
Using this approach, authors will receive a decision from the action editor indicating whether and how their study will be subsequently handled. Action editors may conditionally accept the registered report, they may send the registered report out for peer review, they may ask for a revision of the registered report, or they may reject the registered report, but allow for the project to be submitted following regular paper submission procedures. Registered reports deemed incompatible with the mission of AMD may also be desk rejected or rejected after review. Such reports cannot be submitted following the regular paper submission track. Any registered report that reaches “conditional accept” stage will be ultimately evaluated on whether the authors actually conduct the study and present the findings as outlined in the registered report.
Authors are advised to consult with the Editor-in-Chief if they have questions about the submission process. Correspondence with the Editor prior to submission can help determine an approach that makes sense for the project in question.
For additional information on registered reports, please consult this article by Roman Briker and Fabiola Gerpott in ORM.