Deviations from the pre-registered method

KR Kai Ruggeri
AP Amma Panin
MV Milica Vdovic
BV Bojana Većkalov
NA Nazeer Abdul-Salaam
JA Jascha Achterberg
CA Carla Akil
JA Jolly Amatya
KA Kanchan Amatya
TA Thomas Lind Andersen
SA Sibele D. Aquino
AA Arjoon Arunasalam
SA Sarah Ashcroft-Jones
AA Adrian Dahl Askelund
NA Nélida Ayacaxli
AS Aseman Bagheri Sheshdeh
AB Alexander Bailey
PA Paula Barea Arroyo
GM Genaro Basulto Mejía
MB Martina Benvenuti
MB Mari Louise Berge
AB Aliya Bermaganbet
KB Katherine Bibilouri
LB Ludvig Daae Bjørndal
SB Sabrina Black
JL Johanna K. Blomster Lyshol
TB Tymofii Brik
EB Eike Kofi Buabang
MB Matthias Burghart
AB Aslı Bursalıoğlu
NB Naos Mesfin Buzayu
Martin Čadek
NC Nathalia Melo de Carvalho
AC Ana-Maria Cazan
Melis Çetinçelik
VC Valentino E. Chai
PC Patricia Chen
SC Shiyi Chen
GC Georgia Clay
SD Simone D’Ambrogio
KD Kaja Damnjanović
GD Grace Duffy
TD Tatianna Dugue
TD Twinkle Dwarkanath
EE Esther Awazzi Envuladu
NE Nikola Erceg
CE Celia Esteban-Serna
EF Eman Farahat
RF R. A. Farrokhnia
MF Mareyba Fawad
ask Ask a question
Favorite

There were minor deviations from the pre-registered method in terms of procedure. First, we did include an attention check, and the statement that we would not should have been removed; this was an error. Second, we had initially not planned to include students in the main analyses. Still, our recruitment processes turned out to be generally appropriate in terms of engaging students (16%) and non-students (84%) in the sample. We are therefore not concerned about skew and instead consider this a critical population. The impact of these deviations in the analyses is explained in the Supplementary Information.

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A