Reference health

A Practical Guide to Registered Reports for Economists

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4110803
CiteStamped reference-health badge
46/46 checkable references clean · checked 2026-08-03

Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.

50 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.

The 46 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1371/journal.pone.0172792
Questionable research practices among italian research psychologists
resolves10.1016/j.jesp.2017.09.004
When power analyses based on pilot data are biased: Inaccurate effect size estimators and follow-up bias
resolves10.1016/j.jss.2019.10.049
Post Hoc Power: Not Empowering, Just Misleading
resolves10.1136/bmj.311.7003.485
Statistics notes: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
resolves10.1038/d41586-019-00857-9
Scientists rise up against statistical significance
resolves10.1371/journal.pbio.3000937
Ensuring the quality and specificity of preregistrations
resolves10.1016/S0169-7161(08)00011-4
Dealing with Outliers in Survey Data
resolves10.1007/s40881-016-0028-4
Simulating power of economic experiments: the powerBBK package
resolves10.1126/science.aaf0918
Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics
resolves10.3934/Neuroscience.2014.1.4
Instead of “playing the game” it is time to change the rules: Registered Reports at <em>AIMS Neuroscience</em> and beyond
resolves10.1038/s41562-021-01193-7
The past, present and future of Registered Reports
resolves10.1007/s10683-020-09658-8
Best practices in replication: a case study of common information in coordination games
resolves10.1257/jel.20171350
Transparency, Reproducibility, and the Credibility of Economics Research
resolves10.1177/1536867X20976314
The Romano–Wolf multiple-hypothesis correction in Stata
resolves10.1177/1745691611406920
Bayesian Versus Orthodox Statistics: Which Side Are You On?
resolves10.1007/s11229-019-02456-7
Flexible yet fair: blinding analyses in experimental psychology
resolves10.1371/journal.pone.0005738
How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data
resolves10.1371/journal.pone.0010068
“Positive” Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences
resolves10.1093/reep/reaa011
Feature—Is a Replicability Crisis on the Horizon for Environmental and Resource Economics?
resolves10.1177/1948550615612150
Questionable Research Practices Revisited
resolves10.1126/science.1255484
Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer
resolves10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010571
Ten simple rules for writing a Registered Report
resolves10.1007/s12144-019-00435-2
General trust scale: Validation in cross-cultural settings
resolves10.1177/0956797611430953
Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling
resolves10.1002/ejsp.2023
Performing high‐powered studies efficiently with sequential analyses
resolves10.1177/1948550617697177
Equivalence Tests
resolves10.1177/2515245918770963
Equivalence Testing for Psychological Research: A Tutorial
resolves10.5334/irsp.289
How to Classify, Detect, and Manage Univariate and Multivariate Outliers, With Emphasis on Pre-Registration
resolves10.1007/s10683-018-09597-5
Multiple hypothesis testing in experimental economics
resolves10.1126/science.aal3618
Measurement error and the replication crisis
resolves10.1257/jep.35.3.193
Evidence on Research Transparency in Economics
resolves10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.002
Scientific misbehavior in economics
resolves10.1257/jep.29.3.61
Promises and Perils of Pre-Analysis Plans
resolves10.1177/0149206314527133
The Chrysalis Effect
resolves10.1007/s40881-021-00107-7
The replication crisis, the rise of new research practices and what it means for experimental economics
resolves10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00615.x
Stepwise Multiple Testing as Formalized Data Snooping
resolves10.1016/j.spl.2016.02.012
Efficient computation of adjusted <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si1.gif" display="inline" overflow="scroll"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math>-values for resampling-based stepdown multiple testing
resolves10.1177/09567976211005767
The Effect of Replications on Citation Patterns: Evidence From a Large-Scale Reproducibility Project
resolves10.1177/25152459211007467
An Excess of Positive Results: Comparing the Standard Psychology Literature With Registered Reports
resolves10.1038/515009a
Metascience could rescue the ‘replication crisis’
resolves10.1126/sciadv.abd1705
Nonreplicable publications are cited more than replicable ones
resolves10.1257/pandp.20201077
Research Transparency Is on the Rise in Economics
resolves10.3102/10769986027001077
Quick and Easy Implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg Procedure for Controlling the False Positive Rate in Multiple Comparisons
resolves10.1016/j.jesp.2016.03.004
Pre-registration in social psychology—A discussion and suggested template
resolves10.1007/BF02249397
Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan
resolves10.1177/0049124115610347
Model Uncertainty and Robustness
The 50 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedref1
no DOI — not checkedref10
no DOI — not checkedStar wars: The empirics strike back
no DOI — not checkedref12
no DOI — not checkedref20
no DOI — not checkedObtaining evidence for no effect
no DOI — not checkedref22
no DOI — not checkedRemoving barriers to plant-based diets: assisting doctors with vegan patients
no DOI — not checkedref30
no DOI — not checkedRunning randomized evaluations
no DOI — not checkedThe replicability crisis and the p-value debate -what are the consequences for the agricultural and food economics community?
no DOI — not checkedref33
no DOI — not checkedref34
no DOI — not checkedSample size justification
no DOI — not checkedref42
no DOI — not checkedref46
no DOI — not checkedThe standard error of regressions
no DOI — not checkedref50
no DOI — not checkedPre-analysis plans: An early stocktaking
no DOI — not checkedDegrees of freedom in planning, running, analyzing, and reporting psychological studies: A checklist to avoid p-hacking
no DOI — not checkedSize matters: the standard error of regressions in the
no DOI — not checkedref68
no DOI — not checked116 cl <-makeCluster ( cores [1] -1) # not to overload your computer 117 re gi st erD oParallel ( cl ) 118 results _ 1 <-foreach ( i =1: S , . combine = 'c ' , . packages = ' MASS ') % dopar % { 119 set . seed ( i ) # Set seed here for reproductibility 120 tempRes = simulatedAnalysis
no DOI — not checkedref70
no DOI — not checkedref71
no DOI — not checkedref72
no DOI — not checkedref73
no DOI — not checkedref74
no DOI — not checkedref75
no DOI — not checkedref76
no DOI — not checkedref77
no DOI — not checkedref78
no DOI — not checkedref79
no DOI — not checkedref80
no DOI — not checkedref81
no DOI — not checkedref82
no DOI — not checkedref83
no DOI — not checkedAverage number of rejections if at least one rejection
no DOI — not checked\ n \ n ECONOMETRIC MODEL PRE -REGISTERED : " ) 232 str = paste0 ( str
no DOI — not checkedAverage number of rejections if at least one rejection
no DOI — not checked\ n \ n EXCLUSION RULE PRE -REGISTERED : " ) 236 str = paste0 ( str
no DOI — not checkedAverage number of rejections if at least one rejection
no DOI — not checked\ n \ n COVARIATE PRE -REGISTERED : " ) 240 str = paste0 ( str
no DOI — not checkedAverage number of rejections if at least one rejection
no DOI — not checked\ n \ n WITH BONFERRONI ADJUSTMENT : " ) 244 str = paste0 ( str
no DOI — not checkedAverage number of rejections if at least one rejection
no DOI — not checked\ n \ n COMPLETE PRE -REGISTRATION : " ) 248 str = paste0 ( str
no DOI — not checkedAverage number of rejections if at least one rejection
no DOI — not checkedref95
no DOI — not checkedref96
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings, or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.

checked 2026-08-03 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record

Embed this badge

Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.

<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4110803"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4110803/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[![CiteStamped reference-health badge](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4110803/badge.svg)](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4110803)