Registered Reports, Replication, and the <i>Canadian Journal of School Psychology</i> : Improving the Evidence in Evidence-Based School Psychology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Journal of School Psychology (CJSP) is offering scholars the opportunity to register research reports and make research protocols publicly available to promote replication, transparency, credibility, and utility for clinical practice. The purpose of this article is to outline the challenges regarding replication, reproducibility, and evidence-based practices, as well as describe the submission protocol and criteria for acceptance of registered reports. Advances and criticisms of the registered reports model are discussed. Although CJSP will accept submissions through the traditional peer-review model, registered reports and support of replication studies have the objective of promoting high-quality research to improve the research foundation for evidence-based practices in the profession of school psychology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.909 | 0.969 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.043 | 0.047 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.053 | 0.030 |
| Open science | 0.019 | 0.030 |
| Research integrity | 0.030 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".