Have you really experienced this! Your observations are welcome!
The question in general is quite valid. However, à la lettre, it is not exactly true. I work on negative results in science, and have found that, f.i. a very prestigious journal such as PLOS, has published a paper on negative results. That, I must reckon, is an exception, though.
In general, journals are not so much open to such a sensitive issue even though there are books, chapters and a general agreement about the importance of failures in science.
Yes, dear Carlos Eduardo Maldonado, the case you presented is only exceptional. In most cases, journals are not brave enough to publish negative results! I always wonder why?
It is true that journals are often biased in favor of positive results. Most often, this is because negative results are less likely to be cited and can thus lower a journal’s impact factor. Also, negative results never generate the kind of attention or publicity that breakthrough positive results would, and most top tier journals want that kind of attention. However, it would be unfair to blame only journals for this. Most often, researchers themselves do not submit negative results for publication as they feel it is a failure on their part and might reflect poorly on future grant applications. However, the scientific community has, over the past few years, realized the importance of publishing negative results, and there are several journals and publishers that actively publish them.
Dear Kakoli Majumder, wonderful insight!!
We need to disseminate what the data speak! am I right?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher