We have been working toward this for nearly three years. This isn't just a publication, this is a step toward a more rigorous psychology and forward for team science, open science, and the registered reports format. Let me tell you a bit about why and the journey...1/ https://twitter.com/PsySciAcc/status/1305469257183039488

Ben and @LisaDeBruine proposed this study back in the early @PsySciAcc days, when we read google docs and left comments. I wanted to make sure every study had a methods expert on the leadership team. I had background knowledge in the theory and method, so they invited me on. 2/

We did something hard, developed an analysis plan with code for a complex analysis that considered replication of a model that was originally exploratory (a principal components analysis) across multiple groups. We worked in numerous steps and robustness checks 3/

If you have never done a registered report before, this is a front load of the work. Making sure the code runs, before you even have data (and on such a complex, multivariate analysis) - my PhD is in these methods and it was a challenge. 4/

Ben, Lisa, the network, my colleagues on the Data and Methods committee, they put a lot of faith in me as the methodologist and they all had eyes on this analysis plan, making sure it was the best we could come up with. It paid off, we got an in principle acceptance! 5/

Once the data were in, Lisa ran that code, plopped in the results and sent it back. The reviewers caught an error or two, all we had to do was fix those and we were ready to finalize! But, after submitting their review of the results, one of the reviewers started emailing us...6/

Having a reviewer, personally email the lead male author about the methods, when you are clearly listed as the methodologist and a lead author, with a chapter, that explains methods your dissertation was on, saying the whole plan was wrong... it is my best splain yet. 7/

The whole point of a registered report is that you don't let the results sway what analysis you should do, after all this, is this really what was going to happen?! No. We didn't let it. We considered the accusation and I wrote a detailed response. 8/

The editor stepped in, the reviewers stepped up, and the manuscript is better for it, we revised our interpretations. One reviewer noted that, if this were not a registered report, they could have imagined us being forced to change up the entire analysis plan, post hoc. 9/

So this is a step forward for a massive team (and the many ECRs fueling it, including me), pushing against the system, to collect data we all can use, and to uphold the goal of the registered reports model. I hope it only gets easier from here. 10/

One of the challenges is, it can be hard to see how all of us contributed. I'm thankful to be a small part of it, and I hope others will share their contribution to this landmark study. Thank you to all of you. We can do so much more when we work together end/