PLOS position on Publishing all Studies

[gemy]

Publish Negative Results ? Really? Yes, really.


Of course this is more fit for the science forum we do not have, but I think some valid points are made.

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by gemy

Publish Negative Results ? Really? Yes, really.


Of course this is more fit for the science forum we do not have, but I think some valid points are made.

Negative results are perfectly valid. They let people know what DOESN'T work.

[gemy]

That is what I think too. And even equivocal results. And non Statistically relevant results too

[lisaly]

There's a well known short story that was turned into a movie (Charly) and novel (Flowers for Algernon). In a letter to the doctors who tried an experimental surgery to increase his intelligence. By artificial means, Charlie wrote:

"I recall your once saying to me that an experimental failure or the disproving of a theory was as important to the advancement of learn*ing as a success would be. I know now that this is true. I am sorry, however, that my own contribution to the field must rest upon the ashes of the work of two men I regard so highly."

I, too, think the publishing of negative results is very important.

If you have some free time, read this fictional story. It's one of my favorite pieces of literature.
Flowers for Algernon

[SirTeddykins]

Scientific theory cannot be proven, only disproven.


This makes theory formulation so bittersweet and, really, you have to be a glutton for punishment to partake in any scientific discipline because you are always waiting for the ball to drop on your work. In fact, the hallmark of success is when your work is challenged by prestigious colleagues.


I would love to have my research torn apart by Freud or even Frederick Toates.