Research articles should include all the interesting bits

A learned reader points CMM to the open access journal Experimental Results, a “ forum for experimental findings that disclose the small incremental steps vitally important to experimental research; experiments and findings which have so far remained hidden.”

Rather than an heroic narrative from problem to solution, articles in the journal chart paths taken and not, through research labyrinths, including, “validation and reproducibility of existing findings, null results, supplementary findings, improvements or amendments to published results, as well as results that could be of importance, but for whatever reason, the researcher has not followed a particular line of questioning to produce a full narrative for a traditional paper.”

For cut to the chase researchers this is not.

When you don’t want to take the authors word for it

For profit journal giant Springer-Nature announces an open-data pilot for authors publishing in some of its journals. They can deposit data in article submissions in (Springer owned) Figshare, a “dedicated repository portal and in-article viewer.”

““Open Data has an essential role in increasing the credibility of research – validating data so that researchers can trust it, and combating scientific misinformation so that wider society can trust it” the publisher stares