trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Negative results and methodological failures are publishable in specific academic journals.

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
3 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that negative results and methodological failures are publishable in specific academic journals?

Yes. Negative results and methodological failures can indeed be published, as evidenced by dedicated pathways, calls for publishing null findings, and empirical studies showing that prominent journals do publish negative outcomes.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 3 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

The analysis

The claim is specific and empirically verifiable. Multiple sources confirm that while publication bias remains a challenge, negative results are successfully published in various academic venues, and some high-impact journals feature substantial percentages of negative findings. Therefore, the claim is supported.

Evidence for · 3
Ending publication bias: A values-based approach to surface null and negative results.
2025
Get citation
S, C., E, M., V, A., CG, B., C, B., R, B., S, B., N, B., D, B., S, B., C, C., MR, D., YF, B., S, F., ALJ, F., M, H., DP, H., K, K., R, L., K, L., C, L., N, M., JG, M., E, M., R, M., M, M., S, N., R, N., J, O., MT, P., G, P., AN, R., S, S., JL, S., LN, S., P, S., PW, S., GK, S., MG, T., GE, T., EH, T., L, v. K., & F, W. (2025). Ending publication bias: A values-based approach to surface null and negative results.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3003368

See more details
More for · 2
Balancing the Positives and Negatives: A Bibliometric Analysis of Positive and Negative Study Publication Patterns in High-Impact General Medical Journals.
2026
Get citation
BS, V., C, A., A, K., M, M., & CJ, K. (2026). Balancing the Positives and Negatives: A Bibliometric Analysis of Positive and Negative Study Publication Patterns in High-Impact General Medical Journals.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.108720

Knowledge preservation in the era of big science and AI: strategies for sustainable scientific research.
2026
Get citation
PF, R., A, O., B, W., S, S., C, A., S, V., L, M., K, S., SA, H., RM, F., E, K., CS, G., MS, W., A, M., H, F., LMT, D., IM, G., ALB, P., TJ, R., VMV, B., & TE, G. (2026). Knowledge preservation in the era of big science and AI: strategies for sustainable scientific research.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-72667-3

Related receipts

What does the evidence say?

The claim is specific and empirically verifiable. Multiple sources confirm that while publication bias remains a challenge, negative results are successfully published in various academic venues, and some high-impact journals feature substantial percentages of negative findings. Therefore, the claim is supported.

Receipt History
first checked04 Aug 2026
judged → SUPPORTED · 8004 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work