How Failing Better Could Advance Science

nautil.us

11 pointstalles3 comments

I'm always shocked to read about how academia -- especially scientific fields -- punishes failure of the 'Experiment did not succeed' type.

My 6th grade science teacher was adamant that the scientific method is about testing, logging, and refining... While I get not working doesn't usually make for an interesting paper, isn't it important for scientists to share what doesn't work as often as what does?

Or have I just gotten the wrong impression from a few articles I've seen pop up on HN?

The basic issue is the intrusion of the MBA.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/10/the-scourge-of-manage...

These MBAs have latched onto article reference rates as a way to measure "productivity", and negative results rarely gets referenced, thus producing a classic perverse incentive that is distorting the scientific method.

Scientists are already doing what the author suggests. At least one very fine hydrologist and climate scientist of my acquaintance lived by Beckett's motto.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com