You are only making the author seem more correct. You have a system where citations act as cookies and endorse (administrators fault) but that is not the resea

You are only making the author seem more correct. You have a system where citations act as cookies and endorse (administrators fault) but that is not the researchers intent. > Whatever the explanation might be, the fact is that the academic system does not allocate citations to true claims. This is bad not only for the direct effect of basing further research on false results, but also because it distorts the incentives scientists face. If nobody cited weak studies, we wouldn't have so many of them. Rewarding impact without regard for the truth inevitably leads to disaster. You also argue that high quality journals are good at filtering quality. The author presents evidence that this is specious. You furthermore question whether the author worked in academia, which is answered. Given your reading comprehension skills, I wonder if you are in the correct job.