<p>The “file drawer problem” – where study results remain unpublished – distorts scientific evidence and wastes resources, yet its impact on experimental philosophy has remained unexplored. We conducted the first dedicated survey of experimental philosophers to investigate the prevalence, causes, and potential solutions to research attrition in this field. Contrary to the common assumption that journals reject null results, we found that most projects halt during early data analysis or presentation stages. The primary drivers for this attrition are resource constraints and competing priorities rather than statistical non-significance or rejection during peer review. Although researchers are highly aware of the file drawer problem, they view “not publishing in a timely manner” as a relatively acceptable practice compared to other questionable research practices. While the adoption of open-science tools like preprints is growing, few researchers utilize micropublications to share result-independent findings. Participants cited the “extra effort” required to share results as a primary barrier. We conclude that the file drawer in experimental philosophy is often populated by “homeless” data that lack the coherent narrative required for traditional publication. To address this, we recommend adopting low-friction dissemination formats, such as standardized templates and brief reports.</p>