Negative results are published

Journal name:
Nature
Volume:
471,
Pages:
448–449
Date published:
DOI:
doi:10.1038/471448e
Published online

Jonathan Schooler argues in favour of an open-access database of negative results (Nature 470, 437; 2011). But publishing such results in scientific journals is advantageous for authors, who can then list them among their papers.

Several journals specifically publish negative results. I'm aware of the Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine, the Journal of Negative Results — Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and the psychology Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis. There is a forum in the Journal of Universal Computer Sciences for negative results, and PLoS ONE also publishes them. Several other such journals have come and gone; all, I think, are open access.

Even so, negative findings are still a low priority for publication, so we need to find ways to make publishing them more attractive.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Frankfurt, Germany.

    • Bob O'Hara

Corresponding author

Correspondence to:

Author details

Comments

  1. Report this comment #19191

    Nicholas Parrish said:

    Imagine a meticulously edited, online-only journal publishing negative results of the highest quality with controversial or paradigm-shifting impact. Nature negatives. I bet this venue would bring some nice data out of the closet. Any takers?

  2. Report this comment #19502

    Michael Rehman said:

    I have been thinking of NP comment now over a week. I agree..there should be something like 'Nature negatives'. Publications in this kind of journal should also pass through a small/quick review process instead of a 'peer' review.

Subscribe to comments

Additional data