Honestly, it kind of feels like the only research that is valuable to publish is research that reaches some level of statistic significance, but like most items, I think it's also important to be publishing the science that finds no significance (assuming people understand how to cite and use that research). Sometimes there's a good amou…
Honestly, it kind of feels like the only research that is valuable to publish is research that reaches some level of statistic significance, but like most items, I think it's also important to be publishing the science that finds no significance (assuming people understand how to cite and use that research). Sometimes there's a good amount of data to be had in "what's the design of a study that failed" so that people can potentially determine "how can we start with a better question to ask" in essence, but academia doesn't see the same value in the kind of research that may be "negative test cases" as other fields might be interested in that.
Honestly, it kind of feels like the only research that is valuable to publish is research that reaches some level of statistic significance, but like most items, I think it's also important to be publishing the science that finds no significance (assuming people understand how to cite and use that research). Sometimes there's a good amount of data to be had in "what's the design of a study that failed" so that people can potentially determine "how can we start with a better question to ask" in essence, but academia doesn't see the same value in the kind of research that may be "negative test cases" as other fields might be interested in that.