Abstract
Two ideas are popular among biologists. The first idea is concerned with the biased nature of biology, especially the idea that biologists have overemphasized the importance of competition in the past. The second idea is concerned with progress in correcting for biases, namely, that the biased nature of biology decreases with time. To test these ideas, data on the popularity of interaction topics, such as competition, predation, and mutualism, was collected from articles published in biology journals. Research biases should be visible in publication data as systematic over- and underemphases regarding the popularity of alternative, viable research topics. Were the two ideas correct, data should show that the popularity of a historically dominant topic(s) diminishes with time, whereas the popularity of historically marginal, alternative topics increases with time. The data show that the two ideas are false. According to publication data, the biased nature of biology increases with time, which is a sign of regress rather than progress in biology.