The benefits of preregistration and Registered Reports

Practices that introduce systematic bias are common in most scientific disciplines, including toxicology. Selective reporting of results and publication bias are two of the most prevalent sources of bias and lead to unreliable scientific claims. Preregistration and Registered Reports are recent developments that aim to counteract systematic bias and allow other scientists to transparently evaluate how severely a claim has been tested. We review metascientific research confirming that preregistration and Registered Reports achieve their goals, and have additional benefits, such as improving the quality of studies. We then reflect on criticisms of preregistration. Beyond the valid concern that the mere presence of a preregistration may be mindlessly used as a proxy for high quality, we identify conflicting viewpoints, several misunderstandings, and a general lack of empirical support for the criticisms that have been raised. We conclude with general recommendations to increase the quality and practice of preregistration.