123
Distribution of more than 64,000 Z-values from PLOS ONE. Despite being a journal that welcomes null results, there's a huge hole of non-significant studies.
(raw.githubusercontent.com)
Created by Adrian Barnett: https://twitter.com/aidybarnett/status/1572006426167619585
I mean I'm speaking from first hand experience in academia. Like I mentioned, this obviously isn't the case for people running prohibitively costly experiments, but is absolutely the case for teams where acquiring more data just means throwing a few more weeks of time at the lab, the grunt work is being done by the students usually anyways. There are a lot more labs in existence that consist of just a PI and 5-10 grad students/post-docs than there are mega labs working cern.
There were a handful of times I remember rerunning an experiment that was on the cusp, either to solidify a result or to rule out a significant finding that I correctly suspected was just luck - what is another 3 weeks of data collection when you are spending up to a year designing/planning/iterating/writing to get the publication?