Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.4K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
11.4K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

16.2K
Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
16.2K
Bias01:22

Bias

8.0K
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...
8.0K
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

113.7K
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value. 
113.7K
Naturalistic Observations02:30

Naturalistic Observations

18.1K
If you want to understand how behavior occurs, one of the best ways to gain information is to simply observe the behavior in its natural context. However, people might change their behavior in unexpected ways if they know they are being observed. How do researchers obtain accurate information when people tend to hide their natural behavior? As an example, imagine that your professor asks everyone in your class to raise their hand if they always wash their hands after using the restroom. Chances...
18.1K
Statistical Analysis: Overview01:11

Statistical Analysis: Overview

17.6K
When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
17.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Letters to the editor or correspondence written opaquely by AI/LLMs: a rising plague in science, but on whose shoulders does the onus of proof lie?

Intensive care medicine·2026
Same author

Reply to the Letter to the Editor: Editorial: AI-assisted Letters to the Editor-Scope of a Growing Ethical and Practical Concern, and CORR's Approach to Managing It.

Clinical orthopaedics and related research·2026
Same author

Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Writing and Editing, and the Rise of "Tortured Phrases" in Nursing Literature.

Nursing & health sciences·2026
Same author

The DoDof6-DoHY5 regulatory module mediates glucomannan biosynthesis in Dendrobium officinale by integrating jasmonate and light signaling.

The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology·2026
Same author

AI, bibliometric ethics, and the need for practical wisdom.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2026
Same author

Expanding the scope of collective responsibility in neuro-oncology: The integrity of the published record.

Neuro-oncology·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 7, 2026

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion
08:29

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion

Published on: March 31, 2022

5.0K

Negative results: negative perceptions limit their potential for increasing reproducibility.

Jaime A Teixeira da Silva1

  • 1, P.O. Box 7, Miki-cho Post Office, Ikenobe 3011-2, Kagawa-ken, 761-0799, Japan. jaimetex@yahoo.com.

Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine
|July 8, 2015
PubMed
Summary

Negative results are crucial for scientific progress, yet most are unpublished due to publication bias and limited channels. Addressing this requires a shift in scientific mindset and increased publishing opportunities for negative findings.

More Related Videos

Enhanced Reproducibility and Precision of High-Throughput Quantification of Bacterial Growth Data Using a Microplate Reader
09:15

Enhanced Reproducibility and Precision of High-Throughput Quantification of Bacterial Growth Data Using a Microplate Reader

Published on: July 27, 2022

2.9K
Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients
07:34

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Published on: August 22, 2018

8.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 7, 2026

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion
08:29

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion

Published on: March 31, 2022

5.0K
Enhanced Reproducibility and Precision of High-Throughput Quantification of Bacterial Growth Data Using a Microplate Reader
09:15

Enhanced Reproducibility and Precision of High-Throughput Quantification of Bacterial Growth Data Using a Microplate Reader

Published on: July 27, 2022

2.9K
Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients
07:34

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Published on: August 22, 2018

8.7K

Area of Science:

  • Scientific Research Methodology
  • Publication Ethics

Background:

  • The majority of scientific data generated is negative, indicating unfavorable outcomes.
  • Current scientific publishing predominantly favors positive results, marginalizing negative findings.
  • A subset of negative results is published to contextualize positive findings, but many remain inaccessible.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight the critical role of negative results in scientific advancement.
  • To identify barriers hindering the publication of negative results.
  • To advocate for a more inclusive publishing framework for all scientific data.

Main Methods:

  • This is an opinion piece, not an empirical study.
  • Analysis of traditional scientific publishing paradigms and their impact on data dissemination.
  • Discussion of the psychological and systemic factors influencing the perception and publication of research outcomes.

Main Results:

  • Most scientific data is negative, yet rarely published.
  • Traditional mindsets and publishing frameworks create bias against negative results.
  • Limited availability of publishing channels exacerbates the underrepresentation of negative findings.

Conclusions:

  • Negative results are essential for robust scientific development and understanding.
  • A shift in scientific mindset is needed to value negative findings equally with positive ones.
  • Expanding publishing avenues for negative results is crucial for comprehensive scientific knowledge.