Recently at Vox there was a post titled "Science is broken. These academics think they have the answer." The post was focused on "the fact that science sometimes fails" and in it Vox was discussing a series at Science that was looking at "structural flaws within science" and solutions for addressing them. The post discusses transparency and lack of replication, as well as, a set of guidelines for publishing scientific studies from The Center for Open Science's Transparency and Openness Promotion Committee. There is also a line in the post that has stuck with me: "Researchers are encouraged to publish novel, positive results and to warehouse any negative findings." The positive then isn't always positive, and I hope that you will share your thoughts on this idea, the fact that science sometimes fails, the guidelines referenced above or anything you find yourself stuck on in the comments section below. Thanks.
(Photo - http://www.vox.com/2015/6/27/8854105/new-science-guidelines)