Just thought I'd share this paper I came across. Have only read the abstract so far but it looks promising...

I agree with most of the author's points. But trying to publish negative results is hard and can hurt your career as they don't get many citations. What he is proposing will make us better researchers but will kill our careers to the point we aren't researchers, defeating the point.

To prevent the circular reasoning, we need journals to enforce some rules or have higher standards. And I don't know how why they would do that. Which is rather unfortunate and make you wonder what has academia become :(

Paywall journals will never do this.
What could be done however is for funding bodies to request a full report to be made of all attempted work including negative results which could then go on a free website for others to access.
Funders should demand to know how all of their money was spent. Not just the edited highlights.