Which practice is likely to help mitigate reproducibility problems in journal publications?

Moving away from a review process that favors the publication of positive results is essential for addressing reproducibility issues in scientific research. This approach encourages transparency and honesty in reporting findings, regardless of whether they confirm existing theories or show negative or inconclusive results.

When journals predominantly publish positive results, it creates a publication bias, where only successful studies are highlighted. This bias can lead to an incomplete understanding of a particular research area, as it ignores the valuable information that negative results can provide. Negative results are just as crucial for the scientific method, as they can highlight potential flaws in experimental design, suggest alternative hypotheses, or open new avenues for research.

By fostering a review process that values all research results, journals can contribute to a more balanced and comprehensive scientific literature. This inclusive approach helps researchers build upon a more complete dataset, improving the reproducibility of studies and fostering a culture of open inquiry. It ultimately leads to more reliable scientific advancements, as researchers can replicate studies with a more accurate understanding of previous findings.