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) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

单尾测试：让我们（负责任地）这样做。

预先注册后，单尾测试对假阳性结果的控制率与双尾测试相同。如果研究人员正确识别了效果的方向，它们也会更强大。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。此处提出的论点仅适用于明确预先注册测试的情况。如果权力确实像统计改革者所建议的那样紧迫，那么对预先注册的单尾测试进行深思熟虑和深思熟虑的使用不仅应该被允许，而且在研究人员渴望更大权力的情况下应该受到鼓励。单尾检验特别适合应用问题、重复先前记录的效应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明智地使研究人员陈述的理论与其测试的假设保持一致，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) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。