부산대학교 도서관

This article reflects on a new kind of registered report (RR) that replicated the work of an early career researcher. The research items targeted in this RR were peer‐reviewed, cross‐sectional, dyadic studies to which the first author of this RR had contributed. The findings being replicated are not noteworthy for their prestige or representativeness of the wider field. Instead, this method of replication may have several benefits and less desirable qualities for the researcher and research team whose work is being replicated, for science more broadly, and for relationship science specifically, reviewed herein. The authors hope that this reflection inspires researchers to improve upon their methodology by incorporating replication of their work early and often into their own research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]