Reporting negative results to stimulate experimental hydrology

This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 1 of this Preprint.


Download Preprint

Supplementary Files

Tim van Emmerik, Andrea Popp, Anna Solcerova, Hannes Müller, Rolf Hut 


Experimental work in hydrology is in decline. Based on a community survey, Blume et al. showed that the hydrological community associates experimental work with greater risks. One of the main issues with experimental work is the higher chance on negative results (defined here as when the expected or wanted result was not observed despite careful experimental design, planning and execution), resulting in a longer and more difficult publishing process. Reporting on negative results would avoid putting time and resources in repeating experiments that lead to negative results, and give experimental hydrologists the scientific recognition they deserve. With this commentary, we propose four potential solutions to encourage reporting on negative results, which might contribute to a stimulation of experimental hydrology.



Earth Sciences, Hydrology, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences and Mathematics


hydrology, experimental, fieldwork, negative results, publishing


Published: 2018-03-13 11:12


CC BY Attribution 4.0 International

Add a Comment

You must log in to post a comment.


There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.