Here's another article based on a trend I just don't get. Studies that yield negative results tend not to be published, or even submitted for publication. The article refers to such studies several times as "failed" studies.
This runs contrary to the principle I taught my junior high science students thirty years ago. I had them come up with an experimental design, create a hypothesis, perform the experiment, and document their results, just like any science class. The most significant lesson from this process isn't just how to perform and document an experiment; it's recognizing that even if your hypothesis is incorrect, you've learned something about the phenomenon you're studying.
It's hard to believe that the scientific community overall is just realizing the importance of negative or unexpected results. The next time someone studies a certain phenomenon, reviewing negative results tells them what to exclude or control. Otherwise they may unknowingly include factors that have already been shown to affect the results.
#Science #ScientificMethod #Methodology
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-01389-7