> If people are so interested, they'd presumably read and cite null-result publications,

The thing is, people mostly cite work they're building upon, and it's often difficult to build much on a null result.

If I'm an old-timey scientist trying to invent the first lightbulb, and I try a brass filament and it doesn't work, then I try a steel filament and it doesn't work, then I try an aluminium filament and it doesn't work - will anyone be interested in that?

On the other hand, if I tested platinum or carbonised paper or something else that actually works? Well, there's a lot more to build on there, and a lot more to be interested in.

It depends. If I was also trying to invent a lightbulb, or maybe develop new materials for you to try as filament, I might be very interested to know what you’ve already tried.

I think the failed efforts merit at least a mention, if not a whole publication, otherwise everyone will wonder if they can save money on platinum filaments by switching to aluminum. All the lightbulb companies will continuously be re-confirming that null result internally as part of various cost-reduction R&D efforts.