1 completely out of order. When this method is used to draw the opposite conclusion and has a significant level, it shows that the theoretical basis of our preface is problematic. Therefore, it is best to find a new theoretical explanation, completely change the way of thinking, write a preface and study hypotheses. Some professors advocate writing articles with results as the core, which is the way of thinking. Before we do the experiment, we should make an open hypothesis, and then sort out the literature and preface according to the results, instead of writing the preface in advance.

2 looking for bright spots this method feels more in line with your problem. Generally speaking, there are few research results that fully meet the expectations. There will always be some or even most. Therefore, it is necessary to emphasize 1) what our results are in line with expectations, and 2) what the reasons are not, and make a very detailed exposition in the discussion, such as the reasons for sample size, sampling deviation, questionnaire validity and so on. We can have very detailed details. 3) Nevertheless, our research is valuable and innovative, and the value and innovation of the research are fully discussed. In this way, although the results are not in line with expectations, the whole study is still meaningful and may be fully reflected in the article.

The above is my personal paper writing experience, purely manual, I hope it will help you.