Special Issue on Registered Reports of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

This special issue examines the application of open-science practices—particularly registered reports—to systematic reviews and meta-analyses in special education and synthesizes evidence for three widely used classroom interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD): self-determination interventions, time-out, and token economies. The issue was motivated by gaps identified in prior mega-reviews and a broader concern about publication bias and methodological opacity in the review literature. Collectively, the papers highlight persistent methodological and reporting limitations and argue that broader adoption of open-science practices is essential to reduce bias, enhance replicability, and better inform equitable, scalable practices for students with EBD. Finally, in a concluding commentary, experts discuss the potential benefits and challenges of publishing systematic reviews as registered reports and offer practical recommendations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavioral Disorders
Published
2025-12-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01987429251400215
Primary Topic
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Special Issue on Registered Reports of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Corey Peltier, Benjamin S. Riden, Joshua M. Pulos
Behavioral Disorders
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
article

Special Issue on Registered Reports of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Corey Peltier, Benjamin S. Riden, Joshua M. Pulos
article en

Abstract

This special issue examines the application of open-science practices—particularly registered reports—to systematic reviews and meta-analyses in special education and synthesizes evidence for three widely used classroom interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD): self-determination interventions, time-out, and token economies. The issue was motivated by gaps identified in prior mega-reviews and a broader concern about publication bias and methodological opacity in the review literature. Collectively, the papers highlight persistent methodological and reporting limitations and argue that broader adoption of open-science practices is essential to reduce bias, enhance replicability, and better inform equitable, scalable practices for students with EBD. Finally, in a concluding commentary, experts discuss the potential benefits and challenges of publishing systematic reviews as registered reports and offer practical recommendations.

Behavioral Disorders
James Madison University (US), University of Oklahoma (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Special Issue on Registered Reports of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses — Corey Peltier, Benjamin S. Riden, et al. · Behavioral Disorders (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS