Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Correspondence
Nature 439, 782 (16 February 2006) | doi:10.1038/439782a; Published online 15 February 2006
Open Innovation Challenges
- More Challenges
- Powered by:
nature jobs
Post Doctoral Research Assistant
- University of Bedfordshire
- Bedford, UK
Senior Lecturer / Lecturer in Filarial Parasitology
- LSTM
- Liverpool, United Kingdom
Why negatives should be viewed as positives
Bob O'Hara1, Mike S. Fowler2 & Christine A. Johnson3
- Department of Mathematics and Statistics, PO Box 68 (Gustaf Hällströmin katu 2b), FIN-00014, University of Helsinki, Finland
- Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, PO Box 65 (Viikinkaari 1), FIN-00014, University of Helsinki, Finland
- Evolution, Ecology and Organismal Biology, Ohio State University, 314 Aronoff Laboratory, 318 West 12th Street, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA
Your News story "Journals submit to scrutiny of their peer-review process" (Nature 439, 252; 200610.1038/439252b) reports findings of no bias against manuscripts presenting negative results.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.
RESEARCH
Double-blind review: let diversity reignNature Correspondence (06 Mar 2008)
European grants: a different view puts rich countries aheadNature Correspondence (18 Sep 2008)
High-level similarity of dentitions in carnivorans and rodentsNature Letters to Editor (04 Jan 2007)
