Many researchers have been critical of the biases that the publication process can introduce into science. For example, they argue that a focus on publishing interesting or significant results can give a false impression of what broader research is finding about a particular field.
To tackle this, some scientists have championed the publication of Registered Reports. These articles split the peer review process in two, first critically assessing the methodology of a research study before data is collected, and again when the results are found. The idea being to encourage robust research regardless of the outcome.
In this episode of Nature‘s Take we discuss Nature‘s recent adoption of the format, the pros and cons of Registered Reports, and what more needs to be done to tackle publication bias.