Negative / Null Result ReportOpen accessDecision Sciences
Giuseppe Russo, Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Tim R. Davidson et al. · 2025 · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Journals and conferences worry that peer reviews assisted by artificial intelligence (AI), in particular, large language models (LLMs), may negatively influence the validity and fairness of the peer-review system, a cornerstone of modern…
View details →Negative / Null Result ReportOpen accessDecision Sciences
Yuan Tao, Yu Z, Tianxue Chen et al. · 2026 · iScience
Phytomedicine extraction-process optimization often relies on regression or machine learning models, but model choice is commonly judged by goodness of fit alone. Here, we assembled 1,148 structurally eligible extraction datasets from…
View details →Negative / Null Result ReportOpen accessDecision Sciences
Pablo Ruiz‐Palomino, Juliana Toro‐Arias, María del Pilar Rodríguez‐Córdoba et al. · 2025 · Business Ethics the Environment & Responsibility
ABSTRACT A supportive ethical culture (EC) can encourage moral behavior among employees and help them avoid wrongdoing. One option for fostering EC is ethics training; its longer‐term effectiveness, however, has rarely been examined,…
View details →Negative / Null Result ReportOpen accessDecision Sciences
Mark Ramos · 2025 · Accountability in Research
BACKGROUND: Positive publication bias is the tendency to favor studies that reject null hypotheses for publication and is widely regarded as detrimental to research enterprise quality. However, this view oversimplifies the interplay between selection biases and the statistical properties of hypothesis testing. METHODS: Using theoretical models under varying assumptions about the research landscape in terms of the truth values of hypotheses investigated, we examine how increasing bias towards publishing studies with statistically significant results over those without inflates false positive ra
View details →