When preregistered, one-tailed tests control false-positive results at the same rate as two-tailed tests. They are also more powerful, provided the researcher correctly identified the direction of the effect. So it is surprising that they are not more common in psychology. Here I make an argument in favor of one-tailed tests and address common mistaken objections that researchers may have to using them. The arguments presented here only apply in situations where the test is clearly preregistered. If power is truly as urgent an issue as statistics reformers suggest, then the deliberate and thoughtful use of preregistered one-tailed tests ought to be not only permitted, but encouraged in cases where researchers desire greater power. One-tailed tests are especially well suited for applied questions, replications of previously documented effects, or situations where directionally unexpected effects would be meaningless. Preregistered one-tailed tests can sensibly align the researcher's stated theory with their tested hypothesis, bring a coherence to the practice of null hypothesis statistical testing, and produce generally more persuasive results. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

单尾测试：让我们（负责任地）执行此操作。


预注册后，单尾测试以与双尾测试相同的速率控制假阳性结果。如果研究人员正确识别了效果的方向，它们也更强大。因此，令人惊讶的是，它们在心理学中并不常见。在这里，我提出了一个支持单尾测试的论点，并解决了研究人员可能不得不使用它们的常见错误反对意见。此处提供的参数仅适用于测试明显预先注册的情况。如果权力真的像统计学改革者所建议的那样是一个紧迫的问题，那么不仅应该允许和鼓励在研究人员希望获得更大权力的情况下，应该鼓励有意识地和深思熟虑地使用预先注册的单尾测试。单尾测试特别适合于应用问题、以前记录的效应的复制或方向性意外效应毫无意义的情况。预先注册的单尾检验可以合理地使研究人员陈述的理论与其检验的假设保持一致，使原假设统计检验的实践保持一致，并产生通常更有说服力的结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 （c） 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。