Schweinfurth Manon K, Frommen Joachim G
School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9JP, UK.
Department of Natural Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester M15GD, UK.
iScience. 2024 Dec 24;28(1):111676. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.111676. eCollection 2025 Jan 17.
Science is based on ideas that might be true or false in describing reality. In order to discern between these two, scientists conduct studies that can reveal evidence for an idea, i.e., positive findings, or not, i.e., negative or null findings. The outcome of these studies can either be , i.e., reflecting the real world, or . Much has been said about disentangling true from false positive findings and the danger of a publication bias toward positive findings. Here, we argue that publishing negative findings is important to provide an accurate picture of the real world. At the same time, we highlight that a cautious approach should be taken to minimize the impact of publishing negative findings, which has received limited attention so far. We discuss sources of false negative findings, using experimental and observational animal behavior and cognition studies as examples, which often differ from those of false positive findings. We conclude by recommending strategies for rigorous studies, such as conducting positive controls, selecting diverse samples, designing engaging protocols, and clearly labeling negative findings. These practices will lead to studies that contribute to our knowledge, regardless of whether they result in positive or negative findings.
科学基于一些在描述现实时可能为真或为假的观点。为了区分这两者，科学家们开展研究，这些研究能够揭示支持某个观点的证据，即阳性结果，或者无法揭示，即阴性或无效结果。这些研究的结果要么是 ，即反映真实世界，要么是 。关于如何从假阳性结果中分辨出真阳性结果，以及阳性结果发表偏倚的危害，已经有很多论述。在此，我们认为发表阴性结果对于准确呈现真实世界很重要。同时，我们强调应采取谨慎的方法，以尽量减少发表阴性结果的影响，而这一点迄今受到的关注有限。我们以实验性和观察性动物行为与认知研究为例，讨论假阴性结果的来源，这些来源往往与假阳性结果的来源不同。我们通过推荐严格研究的策略来得出结论，比如进行阳性对照、选择多样的样本、设计引人入胜的方案以及明确标注阴性结果。这些做法将带来有助于我们增长知识的研究，无论其结果是阳性还是阴性。
