Publishing negative results is good for science

ABSTRACT<p>Scientists face challenges in publishing negative results, because most scientific journals are biassed in accepting positive and novel findings. Despite their importance, negative results often go unpublished, leading to duplication of efforts, biassed meta-analyses, and ethical concerns regarding animal and human studies. In this light, the initiative by Access Microbiology to collect and publish negative results in the field of microbiology is a very important and valuable contribution towards unbiassed science.

Some people have to allocate plenty of time to publishing findings that represent minor progress, otherwise there would be quite some time in-between publications.<p>Others don&#x27;t have time or need to document their major positive findings.<p>Either way negative findings always vastly outnumber worthwhile milestones.<p>When is anybody going to be able to publish all that non-fruitful effort with the degree of integrity needed for it to be a valuable part of the reference literature?