Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Bias

Bias

Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...

Feedback Inhibition

Feedback Inhibition

Biochemical reactions are occurring constantly in cells, converting starting substances to different products, usually with the help of enzymes that speed the reactions. Without enzymes, it would take far too long for most reactions to occur to be useful to the cell!

Proofreading

Proofreading

The Scientific Method

The Scientific Method

The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...

Types of Selection

Types of Selection

Natural selection influences the frequencies of particular alleles and phenotypes within populations in several different ways. Primarily, natural selection can be directional, stabilizing, or disruptive. Directional selection favors one extreme trait and shifts the population towards that phenotype while selecting against individuals displaying alternate traits. Stabilizing selection favors an intermediate trait with a narrow range of variation. Deviation from the optimal phenotype towards an...

Blind Procedures

Blind Procedures

Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which child was...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Mental health of health care workers during and after the COVID-19 pandemic - A longitudinal cohort study.

PLOS mental health·2026

Same author

Corrigendum: National Early Warning Score for Predicting Clinical Outcome of Acute Pulmonary Embolism in Intermediate-High Risk Patients.

TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis·2025

Same author

National Early Warning Score for Predicting Clinical Outcome of Acute Pulmonary Embolism in Intermediate-High Risk Patients.

TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis·2025

Same author

The bleeding costs of intensive versus less intensive antithrombotic strategies: a meta-regression analysis.

European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes·2025

Same author

Using SCORE2 with a risk chart or online calculator: impact on model performance, treatment eligibility, and cardiovascular disease prevention.

European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes·2025

Same author

['More research is needed' is a meaningless conclusion].

Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde·2025

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 9, 2026

Improving Small RNA-seq: Less Bias and Better Detection of 2'-O-Methyl RNAs

Improving Small RNA-seq: Less Bias and Better Detection of 2'-O-Methyl RNAs

Published on: September 16, 2019

A two-step manuscript submission process can reduce publication bias.

Yvo M Smulders¹

¹Department of Internal Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands. y.smulders@vumc.nl

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

|July 13, 2013

Summary

Publication bias, where positive results are favored over negative ones, remains a challenge in research. This study proposes a novel two-step peer-review process, blinded to study outcomes, to mitigate this bias.

Keywords:

Bias Blinding Editorial review Peer review Publication bias Statistics

More Related Videos

TMT Sample Preparation for Proteomics Facility Submission and Subsequent Data Analysis

TMT Sample Preparation for Proteomics Facility Submission and Subsequent Data Analysis

Published on: June 8, 2020

A Nonsequencing Approach for the Rapid Detection of RNA Editing

A Nonsequencing Approach for the Rapid Detection of RNA Editing

Published on: April 21, 2022

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 9, 2026

Improving Small RNA-seq: Less Bias and Better Detection of 2'-O-Methyl RNAs

Improving Small RNA-seq: Less Bias and Better Detection of 2'-O-Methyl RNAs

Published on: September 16, 2019

TMT Sample Preparation for Proteomics Facility Submission and Subsequent Data Analysis

TMT Sample Preparation for Proteomics Facility Submission and Subsequent Data Analysis

Published on: June 8, 2020

A Nonsequencing Approach for the Rapid Detection of RNA Editing

A Nonsequencing Approach for the Rapid Detection of RNA Editing

Published on: April 21, 2022

Area of Science:

Medical Research
Scientific Publishing
Research Integrity

Background:

A significant portion of scientific research remains unpublished, leading to potential biases in the scientific literature.
Publication bias, the tendency for studies with positive outcomes to be published more frequently than those with negative outcomes, distorts the evidence base.
Existing solutions to publication bias have proven insufficiently effective.

Purpose of the Study:

To explore a novel approach to mitigate publication bias by implementing an editorial and peer-review process blinded to study outcomes.
To evaluate the feasibility and potential impact of a two-step manuscript submission procedure designed to obscure results during initial review.

Main Methods:

Proposing a two-step manuscript submission process for editorial and peer review.
The first submission would include only the introduction and methods sections.
A subsequent submission, potentially including results and discussion, would follow.

Main Results:

The article discusses the potential advantages and disadvantages of a blinded, two-step peer-review system.
This method aims to reduce the influence of study outcomes on publication decisions.

Conclusions:

A blinded, two-step peer-review process is proposed as a potential strategy to address publication bias in scientific research.
Further discussion and evaluation are needed to determine the practical implementation and overall effectiveness of this approach.