The scientific articles are published with the purpose of telling the other scientists of the same and other fields about the progress and new advancement of the field. But , most of the time articles are written in concise form formulated by the journal and those are needed to be followed strictly to get published of the articles. Due to this and many other causes, most of the articles failed to show the failure result as well as the story about where did the author felt difficulties, how did he/she overcome those problems etc. Considering this, is it not better to published " Behind Story" which should include how did the author get the idea of the work, what difficulties the author faced during experiments, what are the questions asked by the reviewer. I believe the reader would be more benefited from this which the ultimate goal of publication of the scientific work. What do you think?
Yes, I think it is important for readers to know the historicity and context in which the article was written. Md. Rezaul Islam Khan
I don't know about history and story, but failing attempts and null results are absolutely necessary and are part of the scientific process. In my work I insist on keeping hypotheses that failed to achieve support next to the ones that did. Otherwise, you create a dangerous bias toward successful attempts. Some go farther and suggest pre-registration of all hypotheses in the Open Science Framework. .
Dear,
If this idea is accepted and applied in research, then bad and non-honest researchers later will deal with it in illegal way, and may use your wrong results as references in their research in case they got bad results in order to show that their bad/wrong results (as small researchers) is better than your failure results (as a good academic researcher). What if they haven't shown your final/correct results??. Examiners then have to check the whole ref papers to see whether the researcher cite your previous failure results or the corrected and final results.
Sorry, I don't support this idea since its disadvantages more that its benefits, all the research papers should include only the right information and the final proposed work/implementation environment/results.
My co-authors and I addressed the question of researchers withholding negative results in the article below:
Article Curriculum integration of MALL in L1/L2 pedagogy: Perspectiv...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking