'Not novel enough'

Reviewer comments such as 'lacking novelty' or 'why bother repeating previous experiments?' are not only unhelpful, they are harmful to science on the whole. Science is predicated upon the accumulation of data and evidence, collected by independent studies over time. This underlying principal increases the likelihood that seminal/non-seminal studies came to the right conclusions. Synchronicity within the scientific literature demonstrating similar observations allows for independent verification. Meta-studies, our most robust and reliable sources of evidence could not be performed without this. Though we may never reach it, we get one step closer to 'capital-T Truth'.

Accusing manuscripts of lacking novelty is saying: 'people don't need to hear this because I already know what is True'. Historically in science this is almost never the case. Just about every theory, mechanism and explanation will be refined or rejected over time. For this to continue we need to ensure as much high-quality data as possible enters indexed academic search engines. If data collection and analysis are sound and reasonable conclusions drawn, why is novelty given priority?

Everyone is always concerned with 'ThE rEpLiCaTiOn cRiSiS' but when it comes to 'less novel' research, reviewers don't always stand by these concerns. Sometimes we haven't read EVERYTHING and aren't aware our work isn't as 'novel' as we thought. How can one possibly be aware of all relevant publications on a topic while knee-deep in experiments? It is like trying to drink a tidal wave through a straw. Sometimes things will be missed, even with daily alerts. Regardless, independently coming to a similar conclusion as another publication is a great finding. Novelty is overrated.

The research funding crisis has forced overpromising on 'iMpAcT' and embellishment of 'sIgNiFiCaNcE'. Most science is derivative and that's okay. That's where the details are worked out anyway. I'm okay with #notnovel.

This letter was rejected from several journals and now is published on my hIgH iMpAcT tea blog.