this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
1178 points (97.7% liked)

Science Memes

10988 readers
2005 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 53 points 7 months ago (3 children)

There should be more value placed in publishing things that didn't work as hypothesized. That way scientists in the future can know if a particular approach just doesn't work.

Something like this, but completely normalized in the scientific world, where it's ok to publish attempts, whether they succeed or not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I think we can agree "Good reseach" is in the how-its-done. I wish journals would chose/require/verify the how-its-done (time frame, resources, hypothesis, method etc) but after that be contractually required publish whatever conclusion is discovered by the team/project they picked and verified.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

My PhD is a proof my hypothesis is wrong. It was a depressing time 😅

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

I had a null result for my MSc thesis. My supervisor lost interest immediately, and my funding went away. No interest in publishing a failure on his side, because the premise was flawed and he provided the premise. I dropped out and went to industry rather than be student poor with no funding.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

yea unfortunately publishing science (in certain levels) unfortunately now involves %50 razmatazz, %30 having some well established coauthor and %20 over selling. It has turned into a weird ecosystem that feeds on resource (jobs) scarcity in academia and makes insane profits for publishers.

Not surprised it attracted all kinds of vultures that feed on the scraps (predatory publishers). It is really smelling decay and puss from a mile away.