Reforming research funding: Combining editorial preregistration with grant peer review

2025-11-03

AI Summary

Current competitive research funding systems suffer from high peer-review costs and a bias toward conservative, incremental studies, thereby impeding replication efforts, theory-driven inquiry, and high-risk research. To address this, this project innovatively integrates the journal Registered Reports (RR) framework into the grant review process: funding is provisionally committed upon pre-registration and rigorous peer review of the study protocol—decoupling methodological evaluation from outcome-dependent publication pressures. By combining editorial pre-screening, voucher-based incentives for journal participation, and lottery-based funding allocation, the approach fosters alignment between journals and funders. This reform substantially reduces administrative and review burdens, enhances methodological rigor and research transparency, and establishes a scalable, equitable, and reproducibility-oriented funding ecosystem.

Technology Category

• Game Theory and Economic Paradigms: Mechanism Design
• Machine Learning: Feature Construction/Reformulation
• Application Domains: Humanities & Computational Social Science

Application Category

• Security and Privacy: Data transparency and provenance
• Responsible Web: Consent frameworks and practices on the web
• Search and Retrieval-Augmented AI: Web evaluation methodologies and metrics

Abstract

Competitive grant funding is associated with high costs and a potential bias to favor conservative research. This comment proposes integrating editorial preregistration, in the form of registered reports, into grant peer review processes as a reform strategy. Linking funding decisions to in principle accepted study protocols would reduce reviewer burden, strengthen methodological rigor, and provide an institutional foundation for (more) replication, theory driven research, and high risk research. Our proposal also minimizes strategic proposal writing and ensures scholarly output through the publication of preregistered protocols, regardless of funding outcomes. Possible implementation models include direct coupling of journal acceptance with funding, co review mechanisms, voucher systems, and lotteries. While challenges remain in aligning journal and funding agency procedures, the integration of preregistration and funding offers a promising pathway toward a more transparent and efficient research ecosystem.

Problem

• Reducing costs and bias in competitive grant funding systems
• Strengthening methodological rigor through preregistered study protocols
• Promoting replication, theory-driven and high-risk research practices

Innovation

• Integrating editorial preregistration with grant peer review
• Linking funding decisions to accepted study protocols
• Using co-review mechanisms and voucher systems for implementation