Innovative approaches like most scientific projects are naturally associated to some risks. The exciting world of research is full of unpredictable results. There is a long way of hard work before obtaining a significant result and after it, only positive results are normally published. SACSIS, with the help of The All Results Journals, give to negative results the importance they deserve and will combat the existing publication bias in drug chemistry, biochemistry and biomedical research.
One of the biggest ambition of SACSIS is to combat what might actually be the biggest problem under publication bias: submission bias, that is, the authors’ resistance to publish negative results.
Science is a deeply frustrating pursuit. One reason scientists may be resistant to publish negative results might be that researchers want their competitors to think they succeed at every project designed. Other times we get negative results and both, don't find a place where all these results can fit properly and/or there is no specific journal to publish only negative findings. Another reason is rooted in the way the human brain works. We carefully edit our reality, searching for evidence that confirms what we already believe. The problem with science, then, isn’t that some experiments have negative results — it’s that most negative results are ignored and never published.
There is another important reason: what happens with the results that are not 100% reproducible? We all have performed experiments that only work 6 times of 10. Where do these experiments fit? Are these experiments less worthy to communicate?
In SACSIS we give these experiments the importance they deserve and publish them in The All Results Journals (after peer-review considerations).
