The issue is probably two-pronged: 1. There is pressure from the department (and funders, as the article mentions) to produce publications. The need to publish

The issue is probably two-pronged: 1. There is pressure from the department (and funders, as the article mentions) to produce publications. The need to publish leads to researchers to spin null results as a way to "cash in" the time and effort put into a research project (I'm assuming good intentions here on the part of the researchers). 2. Articles get published if the authors can argue that their work makes a new and unique contribution to the field. This argument usually rests less on the article's results and more on the discussion of these results. I am not surprised that authors spin the results in their discussion sections. As a side note, most readers only read the introduction and discussion section of a paper. Those two sections usually have the most spin as they are written to "hook" readers in the paper (and to an extent, to be accessible to a non-technical person sometimes outside of the field). Lit review, methods, and results sections are usually more dry as they report on the technical aspects of a research project.