What reforms do you think would be most effective in encouraging the publication of null or negative results?

Answer Explanations

• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-725842
  • Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of the outcome: Mandating all research outcomes would ensure that null or negative results are included in the scientific literature, providing a more comprehensive evidence base.
    
    
  • Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results: Establishing journals specifically for null or negative results would provide a platform for these studies, encouraging publication and recognition.
    
    
  • Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research: Reforming academic incentives to value all well-conducted research, regardless of the outcome equally, would reduce the pressure to produce positive results and promote the publication of null or negative findings.
    
    
  • Other (please specify): Implement policies that promote open data sharing and transparency, encourage peer reviewers and editors to consider the scientific rigour and methodology rather than the results, and increase awareness about the importance of null and negative results in advancing science.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome

  user-525512
  This can be achieved by the implementation of policies stating that results from all studies, regardless of their magnitude or direction of effect, be published. This would ensure transparency and prevent selection bias that might affect research in general.
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-111275
  Null or negative results could be the inicial insigth to other positive results 
• Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results

  user-350867
  NTP did this with their research report series.  Particularly for their work in crumb rubber.  Really hard to get exposure to these particles and they published what did not work and the little that did.  Prevents others from making the same mistakes and wasting precious research dollars
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-887652
  Unfortunately the only way to do this is to eliminate financial incentives at every level.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-828172
  To understand, and appreciate, that a negative, or null, outcome can provoke a reader to question accepted norms.
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-971114
  Publication of research conducted via rigorous study should be considered
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-787588
  There are some journals already dedicated to negative results. However, the main goal would be to change the way reviewers and editors evaluate manuscripts
• Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-887682
  In fact some journals are publishing null or negative results. However, these limited in number journals are open access and not everyone can pay publication fee. Subscription journals can be offered for example. In addition, academicians should be encouraged to publish true results after rigorous research.  
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-11487
  Pressure on journals to publish equal numbers of positive and negative studies.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-232888
  That's correct. The reforms above should help!
• Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results

  user-731929
  I believe that negative results are extremely important and deserve special attention; unfortunately, to change current practices is very difficult; thus, it is faster and more efficient to have special journals.
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-534444
  Registered reports (or at least time-stamped preregistrations)
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-902950
  All three propositions are good and valid. Rigorous research will always generate a mixture of results - positive or negative - though the incentives to publish the latter are lacking. The knowledge about negative results would likely curtail some unnecessary studies to be taken by other research groups/lines, thus maximizing time, money, and human resources.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-765807
  1. Requiring the publication of all study results: Mandating that researchers publish all their findings, regardless of outcome, would reduce selective reporting and ensure transparency.
  2. Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results: Establishing journals specifically for negative or inconclusive findings provides a platform for sharing this important information. Researchers would be more likely to submit such results if they have a dedicated outlet.
  3. Changing academic incentive structures: Shifting away from rewarding only positive results and emphasizing rigorous research would motivate scientists to publish null or negative findings. This could involve recognizing pre-registered studies, replication efforts, and transparent reporting.

  
  
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Other (please specify)

  user-640071
  Honest reviewing and financial incentives to honest reviewers.
• Other (please specify)

  user-293647
  I feel having guidance for reviewers for the consideration of negative results would be useful.  Product stewardship support is very important for industry and should be important for everyone.
• Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results

  user-508906
  Embedding negative results in studies that also show relevant differences
• Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-676656
  Pre-acceptance of papers (before results known) in the more prestigious journals
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-570468
  I think we should value rigorous and reproducible research, even if the results aren't great. This would encourage the development of good study protocols and using appropriate methodologies. Hopefully!
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-781389
  sending controversial papers to experts in the fields employed (ie, immunology, genetics) rather than experts in the field (ie, paleontology) that are not familiar with the methods or controls employed.
• Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-612527
  educate journal editors about the importance of replication and null findings...
• Other (please specify)

  user-584178
  Changing minds among scientists, especially clinician-scientists. Understanding what NOT to do is important as well.
• Other (please specify)

  user-673264
  No comments
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-650602
  Somehow, someway the whole article publishing system needs rebuilt.  The predatory journals that siphon money away from the sciences.  Journals charge an exorbitant sum to publish, another crazy amount to libraries for access, and yet another to read if you don't have access thru your institution!   That is a huge problem that keeps negative results from being published.  And that they charge these amounts, without producing physical journals anymore, but they still rely on unpaid labor!  Mostly there is institutional pressure on young scientist to give their time freely, and then older PIs push the work off on others. 
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-149459
   Encourage journals to adopt policies that require the publication of all registered clinical trials, regardless of the outcome. 
   Funding agencies can require that all results, including null or negative results, be published as a condition of the grant. 
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome

  user-8496
  If the submitted research publication is based on correct questions / hypotheses then the eventual result should be published whether positive or negative.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-753537
  Registration of protocols before the start of any study + requirement to follow up by publishing results. Not sure about dedicated journals but I would suggest more platforms or options to publish these findings easily, e.g. in short reports or online databases  
• Other (please specify)

  user-583633
  Educating scientists how to do better science. If writing a negative results paper training scientists to understand what of any value the publication brings to the scientific community
• Other (please specify)

  user-520983
  Changing the scientific journal's incentive to value all rigorous research
• Other (please specify)

  user-388091
  I do not believe this is a problem. A rigorous study is published somewhere even if it is negative - its only the magazines that won't publish such stuff but many legitimate journals that will. Moreover, if one simply wants to release a negative result, there are archives such as bioRxiv, that are very reputable and even PubMed cited so everyone can find them. The latter is fairly new, but for example, my lab could not reproduce a prominent magazine article's results and so we posted our results in bioRxiv and it got very good response, people now know not to waste their time, and we could move on, having done our duty to the scientific community. 
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome

  user-861631
  Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome, would be a crucial reform to reduce publication bias and promote scientific integrity. This approach would ensure that all data collected during research is shared with the scientific community, providing a more complete and accurate picture of reality. Publishing all results, including null or negative ones, would help avoid duplication of efforts and allow for a better understanding of the phenomena being studied. Additionally, this transparency could foster trust in the scientific process by demonstrating that the validity of research does not depend on positive results but on methodological rigor and honesty in data presentation.
• Other (please specify)

  user-235868
  There is a trend in publishing negative results. For now I think that regulators should stay out of this.
• user-414245
  Null results are easy to achieve by testing hypotheses where the connections are tenuous to begin with.  With few exceptions, science moves forward by positive results.  A few decades back, publication was a costly and time consuming enterprise.  It would have been impossible to "publish all results".  Today, it is not expensive to publish on-line, but still, the idea of publishing "all results" is ill conceived.  There is already more publications than even specialists can read.  Maybe if AI takes over all science, null results can be published, since the AI can sort through them electronically.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-951310
  A combination of the options made available could be a start toward encouraging publication of null or negative results.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Other (please specify)

  user-409588
  Submission of the methods along with statistical analysis to prior to the conduction of the study. 
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Creating dedicated journals for null or negative results Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-773118
  Encourage high quality researches on what have been published and widely accepted. Personally, some of my inventions are based on disproving what have been established (but wrong as found by me). For examples, some metalloporphyrins and photosensitizers such as hypericin for photodynamic therapy (PDT) were regarded as tumoritropic or tumor-seeking agents, but they turned out to be necrosis-avid by my re-evaluations, which have been exploited to develop contrast agents for imaging myocardial infarction or stroke, and radionuclide-conjugated agents for targeted broad-spectrum anticancer theragnostics.  
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-683654
  People should be promoted, not just on publications, but various factors such as teaching experience, ability to attract grants, professional experience, activity in learned societies, and a host of other factors.  
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-606148
  It should be standard practice to require at least an archival notice of research in progress, before the outcome is known.  Then the final research report should be paired with the original notice, to indicate that the study was in fact completed.  Academic incentive structures should review what proportion of studies initiated were actually completed and published or at least archived, as well as the quality of the study design in peer review. 
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-649046
  The journal policy and publication culture should change - It must require all results to be submitted and if found scientifically, technically and methodically acceptable should promote its publication and wider distribution.
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Other (please specify)

  user-395453
  Favoring the study robustness over the attractiveness of the results.
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research

  user-561710
  academia is just a romantic idea at this point and we need to re-evaluate how we incentivize research
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-523578
  Expect and monitor publication for all funded research, regardless of outcomes
• Other (please specify)

  user-82487
  Ask the authors to repeat the tests to prove that negative results are reproducible.
• Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-15550
  Pre-registration of all projects 
• Requiring the publication of all study results, regardless of outcome Changing academic incentive structures to value all rigorous research Other (please specify)

  user-74194
  Teaching both humility about one's state of knowledge and critical thinking from middle school onward.