conv.

← The whole story
Science
Nature publishes major study finding cognitive reappraisal measurement methods don't align

Study highlights publication challenges for negative results in neuroscience

1 Nov 2 2:13 PM · 5d ago · 3 articles · 4 posts · 4 sources · development 1 of 1

Ars Technica's coverage notes that Nature's acceptance of this study represents an exception to a widespread pattern: negative results showing methods do not work are typically rejected or relegated to low-profile journals. The decision to publish substantive null findings reflects evolving standards around scientific reproducibility.

Study highlights publication challenges for negative results in neuroscience
arstechnica.com

“It's widely acknowledged that it's nearly impossible to publish negative results in scientific journals. "We didn't see anything" is a much harder sell than finding that a hypothesis is clearly right.”

Ars Technica / research reporting

International research collaboration Study authorsNature journal Publisher

The whole story articlesposts the bright band is this development · numbered dots are the others · click one to jump

Peak 4 pieces in two hours at Nov 2, 1 PM; 9 pieces over 6 days (3 articles · 6 posts) Nov 2, 1 PM — 4 pieces · 3 articles · 1 post — Newswires 2, Google News 1, Bluesky 1Nov 2, 3 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Bluesky 1Nov 2, 5 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Hacker News 1Nov 2, 7 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Bluesky 1Nov 2, 9 PM — quietNov 2, 11 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Bluesky 1Nov 3, 1 AM — quietNov 3, 3 AM — quietNov 3, 5 AM — quietNov 3, 7 AM — quietNov 3, 9 AM — quietNov 3, 11 AM — quietNov 3, 1 PM — quietNov 3, 3 PM — quietNov 3, 5 PM — quietNov 3, 7 PM — quietNov 3, 9 PM — quietNov 3, 11 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Nov 4, 1 AM — quietNov 4, 3 AM — quietNov 4, 5 AM — quietNov 4, 7 AM — quietNov 4, 9 AM — quietNov 4, 11 AM — quietNov 4, 1 PM — quietNov 4, 3 PM — quietNov 4, 5 PM — quietNov 4, 7 PM — quietNov 4, 9 PM — quietNov 4, 11 PM — quietNov 5, 1 AM — quietNov 5, 3 AM — quietNov 5, 5 AM — quietNov 5, 7 AM — quietNov 5, 9 AM — quietNov 5, 11 AM — quietNov 5, 1 PM — quietNov 5, 3 PM — quietNov 5, 5 PM — quietNov 5, 7 PM — quietNov 5, 9 PM — quietNov 5, 11 PM — quietNov 6, 1 AM — quietNov 6, 3 AM — quietNov 6, 5 AM — quietNov 6, 7 AM — quietNov 6, 9 AM — quietNov 6, 11 AM — quietNov 6, 1 PM — quietNov 6, 3 PM — quietNov 6, 5 PM — quietNov 6, 7 PM — quietNov 6, 9 PM — quietNov 6, 11 PM — quietYesterday, 1 AM — quietYesterday, 3 AM — quietYesterday, 5 AM — quietYesterday, 7 AM — quietYesterday, 9 AM — quietYesterday, 11 AM — quietYesterday, 1 PM — quietYesterday, 3 PM — quietYesterday, 5 PM — quietYesterday, 7 PM — quietYesterday, 9 PM — quietYesterday, 11 PM — quietToday, 1 AM — quietToday, 3 AM — quietToday, 5 AM — quietToday, 7 AM — quiet 1
1Study highlights publication challenges…
Nov 3Nov 4Nov 5Nov 6yesterdaynow · 9:14 AM ET

Reported in the same hours no headline names this development itself — these 1 claim were published in its stretch

  1. 2 outlets Most of our measures of a key cognitive process don’t agree

    first by Ars Technica, 5d ago · also Ars Science

All 1 developments of Nature publishes major study finding cognitive reappraisal… →

BlueskyNewswiresHacker NewsGoogle NewsMastodon