[Geodynamics] EGU TS11.3 Learning from failed models and negative results (Posters only)

Laetitia Le Pourhiet laetitia.le_pourhiet at upmc.fr
Sun Jan 7 02:13:33 AEDT 2018

Dear all,
I wish you first a happy new year and would like to draw you attention on
the approaching dead line to submit abstract for EGU.

Our session *"Learning from failed models and negative results
<https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/FqQkCNLwM9iPNmkkTmb0j6?domain=meetingorganizer.copernicus.org> " *
has been growing over the last 2 years
*. *

*It is a great opportunity to discuss some idea that did not work and learn
from others and as is it is poster only, it does not prevent you to request
an oral presentation for your positive result ! *

*Dead line to submit your abstract
<https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/FqQkCNLwM9iPNmkkTmb0j6?domain=meetingorganizer.copernicus.org> is set to 10
Jan 2018, 13:00 CET*

*hoping to share negative results with you *

On behalf of the conveners

Laetitia Le Pourhiet, Cedric Thieulot and Susanne Buiter

*Session details: *
Publication bias in academic research can occur when the outcome of an
experiment or study influences the decision whether to publish it. The
Geosciences are of course not immune to publication bias. This session aims
at discussing the issues surrounding publication bias and how to learn from
failed models and negative results.

In the Geosciences, as in other science fields, a study may have best
chances for acceptance in scientific literature if it confirms a theory or
conceptual idea that is well accepted in the community or if it reaches a
positive result. The cases that fail in their test of a new method or idea
often end up deep down in a drawer (which is why publication bias is also
sometimes called the “file drawer effect”). Additionally, physically sound
simulations may remain unpublished even when they could correspond to a
concept that has not yet been considered because of, for example, scarce
data. Conversely, negative results such as numerical methods that fail to
converge or that turn out not to be worth pursuing also never get
published. This is potentially a waste of time and resources within our
community as other scientists may set about testing the same idea or model
setup without being aware of previous failed attempts.

In this session, we encourage constructive discussions of unexpected,
controversial, failed and/or negative results on any aspect of tectonics,
structural geology, geodynamics, geomorphology and related fields.

Dr Laetitia Le Pourhiet
+33 1 44275883
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.sydney.edu.au/pipermail/geodynamics/attachments/20180106/6fe7a6e3/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Geodynamics mailing list