LAUSR

Our target article presented a critical reanalysis of an impressive dataset published by Jünger et al. on cycle shift differences. Jünger, Kordsmeyer, Gerlach, and Penke (2018) had made bold, deUnitive claims: Cycle shifts do not seem to alter preferences for body characteristics at all, leaving no room for cycle shifts in mate preferences for masculine characteristics or any other assumed indicators of good genes (p. 421). Our article had three goals. First, we reanalyzed their publicly-available data to examine if their null Unding was robust to modest differences in approach. Second, we sought to determine and indeed found that the portions of Jüngers et al.'s preregistration that were omitted from their analyses affected their conclusion. Third, we sought to provide some productive discussion on the advantages and limitations of preregistration. The commentaries speak to speciUc aspects of our claims and the evidence for them, as well as broader issues regarding scientiUc inquiry: strategies for scientiUc progress, exploratory analysis, secondary data analysis. In this brief response, we address several major issues raised by commentators. Our response is organized into 7 sections, the titles of which state our primary claims. Before getting into these matters, however, we note two points of agreement with Jünger et al. (now Stern et al., this issue). Their null assertion partly motivated our target article. Even our modest message that effects may exist represents a sharp contrast against the background of a strong null assertion. Relatedly, we stressed the general point that, while preregistration obligates scholars to proceed with a particular analysis, data from the preregistered study itself can call into question interpretations from that analysis. Stern et al. agree that one should not make strong conclusions in favor of the null hypothesis too early, especially not based on a single study (p. XXX), even one that is preregistered. 1. Stern et al.'s multiverse analysis betrays the logic of multiverse analysis and does not support their claims