There has been much debate on the need for preregistering experimental studies. Opinions differ with some people believing that “pre‐registration should be required—for us to believe the results of papers,” and others believing that “pre‐registration makes no difference to science and just adds work.” This research dialogue brings differing viewpoints together, in an open academic dialogue. Two target articles and two commentaries discuss what pre‐registration does for replicability of studies, and what cost it adds on authors and reviewers. Additionally, in my introduction to the research dialogue, I deliberate on the need for synergy between our journals, review teams, authors, and institutions, in order for any new policies on pre‐registration to be successfully adopted.

中文翻译：

---

学术政策中的协同需求：预注册对话简介

关于是否需要预先注册实验研究的争论很多。意见不同，有些人认为“必须进行预注册，我们才能相信论文的结果”，而另一些人则认为“预注册对科学没有影响，只是增加了工作量”。这项研究对话通过公开的学术对话将不同的观点汇集在一起​​。两篇目标文章和两篇评论讨论了预注册对研究的可复制性有何作用，以及它给作者和审稿人增加了多少费用。此外，在我对研究对话的介绍中，我探讨了期刊，审阅团队，作者和机构之间协同作用的必要性，以便成功采用任何有关预注册的新政策。