FWIW, anti-p-hacking measures are already implemented for clinical trials; they have to register expected outcomes at the beginning.
FWIW, anti-p-hacking measures are already implemented for clinical trials; they have to register expected outcomes at the beginning.
The whole value for a journal is to be able to select once the results are known because that's how you build prestige.
All you are doing in effect is to lay out a good case why journals should and probably will simply die because this level of transparency would be a great thing to have but is incompatible with the publishers model.
Another way of thinking about a journal's incentives is that, by moving the primary peer-review stage before a study has actually been conducted, you greatly expand the number of studies that a journal will interact with, which may provide a larger and more valuable role for entities like journals in world where actual publishing is a trivial matter.