If you have negative data and still want to publish...

[CrossCurrent]

http://www.jnrbm.com/

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[uniqenam]

I feel that even though "publishing a negative" has such a bad reputation and is thought to be a waste of effort, that a number of factors can mitigate that; really it depends on how you sell your story, and the general importance of the research in your field. It's important to plan an experiment where no matter the outcome, the results are interesting/publishable. Of course it's often not feasible, but when it is it's a great experiment, because you know that no matter the outcome it's still a productive use of time.

 

[samsunimomo]

Not to mention, you want to protect your H-index.

 

[Doctor246853]

I feel that even though "publishing a negative" has such a bad reputation and is thought to be a waste of effort, that a number of factors can mitigate that; really it depends on how you sell your story, and the general importance of the research in your field. It's important to plan an experiment where no matter the outcome, the results are interesting/publishable. Of course it's often not feasible, but when it is it's a great experiment, because you know that no matter the outcome it's still a productive use of time.

lol, the name of the game.

 

[uniqenam]

lol, the name of the game.

Yeah, it's something that always makes me feel a little bit funny about science in general. So many times you can really make a story sound sexy, always being a little more aggressive than what your data support in the way you discuss it, which is more likely to get you published but is less ethical.