Today (September 18), Cambridge University Press launched an open-access journal that will address issues in research by taking a different approach to publishing. The journal, Experimental Results, will include findings that have inconclusive or negative results and articles that reproduce or dispute existing research. It will also publish reviewers’ names and reviews to shed more light on the peer-review process, Inside Higher Ed reports.

See “Half the Time, Psychology Results Not Reproducible: Study

“A lot of publishing is about creating a story—we are just trying to tell the truth rather than publish something that catches the imagination,” Fiona Hutton, head of open-access publishing for science, technology, and medicine at Cambridge University Press, tells Times Higher Education. “The reality is that research results are often confusing, inconclusive, or don’t fit a narrative. Discovery is damaged when the focus becomes the research paper...

The publication will provide an outlet for experimental results that might otherwise not be published. “In the past it would have been difficult to publish negative, confirmatory or inconclusive results, as journal editors made decisions on the basis of innovation, interest level and potential for citations. That’s beginning to change now,” says Caroline Black, publishing director at Cambridge University Press, in the news release. Submissions are currently open.  

See “Potential Causes of Irreproducibility Revealed

Emily Makowski is an intern at The Scientist. Email her at emakowski@the-scientist.com.

Interested in reading more?

The Scientist ARCHIVES

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?