The journal Psychological Science totally revamped their review and decision criteria towards good scientific practice (instead of novelty and significance).
E.g., the reviewer instructions say:
"Please do not assume that findings from studies that are not preregistered were the result of a detailed a priori plan - that would be unfair to authors who allow us to see their plans by preregistering them. [...] We do not want to create a situation where authors who preregister have their submissions evaluated more harshly than authors who do not preregister.“
Hear hear!
I consider them (now) to be a real top journal in the field (in the actual, quality-oriented sense; not in the crooked marketing speech JIF sense).