Result-Blind Peer Reviews and Editorial Decisions: A Missing Pillar of Scientific Culture

In: European psychologist, Band 18, Heft 4, S. 286-294

Abstract

The present article suggests a possible way to reduce the file drawer problem in scientific research ( Rosenthal, 1978 , 1979 ), that is, the tendency for "nonsignificant" results to remain hidden in scientists' file drawers because both authors and journals strongly prefer statistically significant results. We argue that peer-reviewed journals based on the principle of rigorous evaluation of research proposals before results are known would address this problem successfully. Even a single journal adopting a result-blind evaluation policy would remedy the persisting problem of publication bias more efficiently than other tools and techniques suggested so far. We also propose an ideal editorial policy for such a journal and discuss pragmatic implications and potential problems associated with this policy. Moreover, we argue that such a journal would be a valuable addition to the scientific publication outlets, because it supports a scientific culture encouraging the publication of well-designed and technically sound empirical research irrespective of the results obtained. Finally, we argue that such a journal would be attractive for scientists, publishers, and research agencies.