this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
1427 points (99.5% liked)

Science Memes

14191 readers
3428 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 59 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Theoretically yes, but in practice, negative results don't usually get published. People don't want to fund negative results. Every fu ding agency is always chasing novelty, and impact. Our scientific community is actually kind of bad with actually doing science. We are lucky if we get negative results widely known these days.

[โ€“] thevoidzero@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago

I'll keep saying it. Let's have a journal system for negative results and replication studies. Give partial credits for it relative to journal papers with novelty.

So if you have an idea you can search there, see if someone has tried it and failed, and how they failed. You can also search a certain paper and see if people have replicated the study.

It'll help everyone immensely.