All of our precious results deserve the same love. But it might take more than love to open a file drawer.
Science is confronted with an apparent paradox. Although almost every researcher agrees that falsification is the key to progress and publication of null results is pivotal in the cumulative process of building knowledge, many more “positive” results are published than expected based on unbiased estimates of effect sizes. Obviously, there are many reasons for this discrepancy. A couple of days ago, Anne Scheel posted a very thoughtful blog post about why we should love null results. If you haven’t read it yet, make sure to do so, it is certainly worth the 10-min read. Whereas I second many of her conclusions, I don’t think having the same love for null effects that we have for significant effects will eventually help in tackling publication bias unless there will be a level playing field. Perhaps this pessimism is due to the take-home of several classics from literature classes taught back in the days in school: think of Romeo and Juliet or Intrigue and Love showing essentially that love is at times not enough to overcome a rigid system of family lineage, class, and seniority rule. Any association with academia is of course only coincidental. Continue reading “Why same love is sadly not enough: Confessions of an ECR about the file drawer”
What separates the truth from a lie? Neurocopiae talks about a recently published preprint on the response costs of lying. And we have blobs!
A couple of weeks ago, I published my first preprint on bioRxiv. Although there are many good reasons to publish preprints, we can put it simple and plain. They are an awesome opportunity to put your work out in the spotlight immediately. No paywall, no editorial evaluation of potential impact, no Reviewer #2. The only drawback is that they are not peer reviewed yet, so you basically have to read the paper as if you were reviewing it for a journal. Luckily, in times of rising numbers of paper submissions, this quickly becomes a habit anyway. Besides posting our drafts as preprints, what is the best thing that we can do to support the cause? Talk about preprints, of course. Continue reading “Tell me lies: the truth about the deceptive ACC (dACC)”
There are many good reasons to start a science blog and neurocopiae has collected a few. Science is what you make of it.
Since this blog is going to be all about the scientific search for the truth, I have to come clean first: I have been pressured lately to share my thoughts with you. Many interesting new journals and conferences have reached out to me “because of my eminence in the field” in the past weeks. I have been flattered by the many read requests to emails that permuted my name in order to grab my attention somehow. To be honest, I was quite surprised to reap the benefits of my scientific outreach. Who would have thought that I could join Atomic Physics 2016 as an honorable guest, Neurosurgery 2017 as a speaker, or the International Journal of Medical & Clinical Imaging as an editor? Continue reading “Super predators moving at the speed of peer review”