Is industry-funded scientific research likely to be biased towards finding positive results? Is industry more likely to work on topics with likely positive outcomes? Using publication-level data and focusing on food groups that are typically considered healthy, I evaluate each article’s abstract using crowdsourcing tools. I find little evidence to support selection on topics with positive outcomes, but industry is less likely to work on topics classified as unrelated to health. Conditional on a topic, I find that industry-funded research is 3.2% more positive compared to non-industry funded research with grains that receive heavier funding responsible for most of the effect. Industry-funded research is also more likely to receive a mention in certain industry newsletters. Coupled with firm incentives to use science to further their marketing efforts, such increased trade press coverage might play a role in shaping consumers’ opinions on what is healthy.

行业资助的科学研究是否可能偏向于寻找积极的结果？行业是否更有可能在可能产生积极成果的主题上开展工作？使用出版物级别的数据并关注通常被认为是健康的食物组，我使用众包工具评估每篇文章的摘要。我发现几乎没有证据支持选择具有积极成果的主题，但行业不太可能在与健康无关的主题上开展工作。以某个主题为条件，我发现行业资助的研究比非行业资助的研究积极性高 3.2%，而获得更多资金的谷物是造成大部分影响的原因。行业资助的研究也更有可能在某些行业通讯中得到提及。