3 ms·
This would lead to a long string of embarrassing cancelled experiments being visible in the literature, and I can only guess that's a main reason it's not done.
by scythe 8y ago
This would lead to a long string of embarrassing cancelled experiments being visible in the literature, and I can only guess that's a main reason it's not done. It gets worse if the experiment was to test a controversial hypothesis (or even, bad publicity around the hypothesis being tested could shut down the experiment, or in some cases, compromise the results).
- darkpuma 8y agoHypotheses could be sealed upon filing. The existence of sealed hypotheses could/should be public, to prevent the system from being gamed by filing dozens of hypotheses at once for the same experiment and then selectively unsealing the one that matched their results. If the experimenter had too many sealed hypotheses to their name, that would be seen as cause for concern. But only a handful of sealed hypotheses would be unlikely to raise any eyebrows. Furthermore keeping one's sealed:unsealed ratio low would be an incentive to publish negative results. This system would also protect the experimenter from political pressure if they were testing a controversial hypothesis.