We identify 15 claims Pham and Oh (2020) make to argue against pre‐registration. We agree with 7 of the claims, but think that none of them justify delaying the encouragement and adoption of pre‐registration. Moreover, while the claim they make in their title is correct—pre‐registration is neither necessary nor sufficient for a credible science—this is also true of many our science’s most valuable tools, such as random assignment. Indeed, both random assignment and pre‐registration lead to more credible research. Pre‐registration is a game changer.

中文翻译：

---

预注册可以改变游戏规则。但是，就像随机作业一样，对于可信的科学来说，它既不是必需的也不是足够的。

我们确定了Pham和Oh（2020）反对预注册的15项主张。我们同意其中的7项主张，但认为没有任何理由可以证明延迟鼓励和采用预注册。此外，尽管他们在标题中提出的主张是正确的-预注册对于可靠的科学既不是必需的也不是充分的-对于我们科学中许多最有价值的工具（例如随机分配）也是如此。确实，随机分配和预注册都可以导致更可靠的研究。预注册可以改变游戏规则。