I recommend reading responses to other branches of the grandparent that address this.<p>I agree that if people do decent studies and get null results, it would be nice if the data became publicly available so further studies can be seen in the context of previous negative results.<p>But given the need for novelty in results, I wonder how much work actually duplicates work previously undertaken with a null result. I suspect it&#x27;s much less than many people in this discussion are assuming.<p>And secondly, there&#x27;s the issue of forcing people to do decent write-ups. Study results are useless without a very detailed description of both the experimental setup and the data collection&#x2F;analysis procedures that were followed. Those write-ups take time and effort, and for an unpublishable result many researchers won&#x27;t find the motivation. One could argue that funding agencies and institutional IRBs must force researchers to write much of this ahead of running the experiment. That might help a bit, but will still leave substantial holes.