I've long wondered if a part of peer review needs to be replication. OR if there needs to be better incentives around finding nothing out. Like, given the goal

I've long wondered if a part of peer review needs to be replication. OR if there needs to be better incentives around finding nothing out. Like, given the goal is getting published, it feels like there should be better incentives for papers around not finding anything in an interesting way, or hypothesis testing and discovering your hypothesis was wrong.