Abstract

A recent paper by Findley et al. (2016) in Comparative Political Studies suggests that the removal of results from a paper may decrease publication bias. However, in the biomedical sciences, a paper without results is not interpretable; therefore, such a solution is not viable for addressing the reproducibility crisis. Instead, Findley et al.’s proposal should form a pre-submission step that enables colleagues and peers to evaluate a paper's experimental design and protocol prior to submission to a journal for regular peer review. Introducing a new, data-free model for peer review would only dilute the efficacy of current models and weaken efforts to improve existing publication practices.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.