Dilemma game

You recently submitted a paper to a reputable journal in your field. You are in a critical stage of your career, and even though you disagree, publications still matter. You used five different statistical methods to test your hypothesis. Three of these methods give significant results, whereas the other two do not. You clearly explained the differences between the various methods and what their implications are. The associate editor just emailed you that they only want to publish the paper if the two methods that do not give significant results are removed from the paper. What action do you take? [[I agree with the associate editor and remove the two methods.]] [[I do not agree and email the associate editor asking him to reconsider.]]

Dear Associate Editor, Upon your request we removed the two nonsignificant results. We moved these to the supplementary materials instead and reference those from the paper. We hope this is to your satisfaction, Researcher A [[Continue]]

Dear Associate Editor, I do not agree with your decision—please reconsider. Kind regards, Researcher B [[Move mouse to send button]]

Two days after you sent your email, you get a notification on your phone. Finally, the associate editor wrote you. You nervously open the email as your tenure evaluation is coming up and this publication could help your case. [[Read the email]]

Dear Researcher A, I requested you to remove the results completely. These two results are not informative and you need to remove them from the supplement as well. Please comply otherwise we cannot proceed. Associate Editor [[Digest email]]

Clearly, the associate editor is unhappy with your decision to move the nonsignificant results to the supplemental files. At the same time, it is unusual for an associate editor to request the complete removal of results based on their judgment. None of the peer reviewers highlighted this as an issue. You now… [[…go over the associate editor’s to the editor in chief]] [[…remove the results because you need this publication to go through as soon as possible]]

Dear Editor, One of your associate editors requested me to remove two nonsignificant results from a paper, and subsequently asked me to scrub them completely after I moved these to the supplemental files. This seems like a rather arbitrary decision to me? Do you agree with your associate editor? Warm regards, Researcher A [[RE: Request from AE?]]

Dear Associate Editor, I do not fully understand, but I removed the results according to your instructions. Please note that I need this publication to be finalized before my tenure portfolio is submitted, and I do not feel like I really have the option to say no in this scenario. Regards, Researcher A [[Send!]]

Dear Researcher A, Please listen to the associate editor. They make these requests for a reason, even if that reason is not available to you immediately. Yours, Editor [[What is happening?!]]

Clearly something is wrong with this journal. It is time to go somewhere else. Why do they get to decide how your work is presented? It is almost as if it is not your work. So long and goodbye! Both to this publication and your career chances. That’s what it can mean to do the right thing nowadays. The end.

The associate editor never responded. Maybe they felt slighted, because ultimately this publication got delayed without justification. There was never clear communication about why, but there was always something. It was with the typesetter, or new errors were introduced. In the end, the publication did not end up in your tenure portfolio - you did get tenure, but not thanks to this process. Would you still have made the same choice if you knew the outcome? The end.

One week later you get a response. [[Read email]]

Dear Associate Editor, Thank you for your comment. Upon careful inspection of the current state of the literature, we think that including the nonsignificant results can strengthen our conclusions and highlight new boundary conditions for future research (cites XYZ). I’d appreciate if you could reconsider your decision. If you need additional information, we are happy to provide more information. Kind regards, Researcher B [[Send]] [[Nevermind—I’m ok with the succinctness of the original email. Just send that one instead.]] [[I’m not sure if this works—I’ll ask a co-author for help]]

Dear Researcher B, Since you don’t want to comply with our request, we cannot publish your paper. Good luck finding another journal! Associate Editor [[Resubmit]]

A few days later, you get an email from the Associate Editor. [[Read the email from the Associate Editor]]

You get a reply from the Associate editor. [[Read email]]

You email a colleague asking how to respond. [[You get an email from one of their graduate students.]]

Dear Researcher B, Our request stands as is, we do not publish nonsignificant results as they are not informative for our readers. Regards, AE [[Resubmit]]

Hi Researcher B, I noticed that on the journal page that they are complying with COPE, and the guideline discourages selective reporting. Maybe you could use it as a basis? [[I agree! Ok, let me tell the associate editor about this]] [[Hmmm, but I don’t think that would work.]]

Dear Associate Editor, Thank you for your comment. Upon careful inspection of the current state of the literature, we think that including the nonsignificant results can strengthen our conclusions and highlight new boundary conditions for future research (cites XYZ). I'd also like to note that your journal is a member of COPE, that actively discourages selective reporting. I’d urge you to reconsider your decision. If you need additional information, we are happy to provide more information. Kind regards, Researcher B [[Finally send your message with confidence]]

You decide to not engage the associate editor at all. The AE was corresponding in such a way that bringing something like this up, would not be productive. You decide to find another journal for this paper. [[Resubmit]]

But then, you realize that the tone of the email is a bit harsh. What do you do? [[Nothing — just hit Send]] [[Revise the email so that you sound more polite]]

You choose to resubmit it to another journal. You find one that is more progressive and submit there. The paper gets published, nonsignificant results included. The end.

Dear Researcher B, The associate editor speaks on behalf of the entire editor team. We are not asking you to selectively report and your referral to COPE is not appreciated. You may still resubmit the paper until midnight. Otherwise we will no longer consider it for publication. Regards, Editor [[What is happening?!]]

The Editor gets back to you a few hours later. [[Read the email from the Editor]]