{"id":1496,"date":"2008-02-26T19:14:10","date_gmt":"2008-02-26T17:14:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/2008\/02\/26\/bias-against-negative-studies\/"},"modified":"2008-03-01T13:32:12","modified_gmt":"2008-03-01T11:32:12","slug":"bias-against-negative-studies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/sciencesurf\/2008\/02\/bias-against-negative-studies\/","title":{"rendered":"Bias against negative studies"},"content":{"rendered":"

We probably all agree that a publication bias against negative studies will severely distorts our opinion. To repeat an earlier Nature letter<\/a><\/p>\n

\nWhy negatives should be viewed as positives … This filtering of results undoubtedly biases the information available to scientists (see, for example “Null and void” Nature 422, 554\u00e2\u20ac\u201c555; 2003). And communication is at the heart of science.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Here is an email that I received from the editor of Immunogenetics Ronald Bontrop (pp D. Devine – sender did not decline publication here)<\/p>\n

\nI’m sorry to disappoint you a second time, but I stand by my original decision.
\nThe three main reasons for this are:
\n1. None of the references cite Immunogenetics;
\n2. The journal no longer publishes negative associations;
\n3. The manuscript does not comply with the criteria set out by Manly (2005) Reliability of statistical associations between genes and disease. Immunogenetics 57: 549-558.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Whatever you think about argument 1. or 3., argument 2. should lead to a boycott of this journal.<\/p>\n\n

 <\/p>\n

\n CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 11.04.2026<\/span>\n <\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

We probably all agree that a publication bias against negative studies will severely distorts our opinion. To repeat an earlier Nature letter Why negatives should be viewed as positives … This filtering of results undoubtedly biases the information available to scientists (see, for example “Null and void” Nature 422, 554\u00e2\u20ac\u201c555; 2003). And communication is at … Continue reading Bias against negative studies<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[497,1715,1712,1717,1711,1714,1710,1716,218,310,1713],"class_list":["post-1496","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-genetics-biology","tag-biases","tag-boycott","tag-genes-and-disease","tag-heart","tag-nature-letter","tag-negative-associations","tag-publication-bias","tag-reliability","tag-science","tag-scientists","tag-statistical-associations"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1496","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1496"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1496\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1496"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1496"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1496"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}