2 ms·
Disproving old papers is done by people attempting replication, not by peer reviewers. Peer review doesn't typically entail replication attempts, it's just a s
by lupusreal 3y ago
Disproving old papers is done by people attempting replication, not by peer reviewers. Peer review doesn't typically entail replication attempts, it's just a sniff test for obvious errors that would embarrass the journal if let through.
- moi2388 3y agoI didn’t claim it was. I merely said both peer reviewers and people disproving results ought to get paid more. Peer reviewers usually don’t even get paid at all, and getting funding for trying to replicate results is often non-existent, meaning at best it gets done by a couple of undergrads