Issues related to peer review

What should the standard be for publishing remote research?

There aren’t any hard and fast rules or boxes to check, just as there are no universal standards for in-person research. Experimental methods should be considered in the context of the protocol and the research question. Given the new pressures to adopt remote testing, reviewers will need to think critically and avoid rejecting a new methodology simply because it deviates from previous conventions. The focus should be on whether the hardware and test protocol are sufficient to support reliable and valid data that inform the specific question being asked.

As an author, what steps should I take to demonstrate rigor of my remote research methods?

Steps for demonstrating rigor of remote research are the same as those for in-person research, with the caveat that novel methods require additional explanation and explicit justification. Some specific considerations appear in the section describing Best Practices

My remote methodology offers less stimulus control than in-person testing. Is that a fatal flaw?

Not necessarily. If you can make a case that stimulus control is good enough to observe the effects being evaluated, then it may be sufficient to describe the methods and note relevant limitations of the methods.