One of the critical pillars of scientific research is that it is
reproducible and free of bias. That is
how other scientists and the public are able to validate and trust new
scientific work. More recently than
ever, with the age of “publish or perish” upon us, it seems that new research
is not held to the same level of scrutiny that it was decades ago. This is
largely because there are not enough qualified people to do the unpaid work of rigorously
peer-reviewing papers. Research funders
and university executives have created an environment such that the number of
publications is just as (if not more) important the quality of them, as this is
one of the most important criterion for awarding tenure-track positions or
research funding.
Additionally, publishing negative
results in scientific journals is very challenging, if not impossible as
journals claim that negative data fails to draw readership. You’d be hard pressed to find any recent
peer-reviewed journal article where the entire results of the study were that
negative. While I understand that new
scientific work needs to “prove” something novel, negative research results are
often not included, or are spun (sometimes using immoral statistical methods) to
make the data appear positive, leading to massive amounts of bias in the field.
What some people fail to see is
that, in some cases, there is nothing wrong with publishing negative
results. There are even cases where they
can greatly benefit society, such as for debunking
public health myths. Pharmaceutical
research is an area where publishing negative results is incredibly important,
yet these results are so often passed over, because a paper will never be
selected for a journal if the sum of the research is that “these 1000 molecules
are ineffective at agonizing the receptor.” In that field, having the need for
new drugs to come to the market to make money for the companies can lead to
additional bias, as the FDA requires drugs to be stringently tested in clinical
trials.
All in all, the publish and perish
culture of today’s scientific research coupled with the inability to publish
negative results is leading to significant issues with bias and reproducibility
that will become detrimental if change is not enacted.
No comments:
Post a Comment