3 ms·

You should be able to build an entire career out of replications: hired at the best universities, published in the top journals, social prestige and respect. To

You should be able to build an entire career out of replications: hired at the best universities, published in the top journals, social prestige and respect. To the point where every novel study is replicated and published at least once. Until we get to that point, there will be far fewer replications than needed for a healthy scientific system.

bonoboTP 2y ago
> social prestige and respect This one is the showstopper. No matter what you do with rules and regulations, if people aren't impressed by it at a watercooler conversation, or when chatting at a cocktail party at a conference, or when showing a politician around in your lab then nothing else matters. How prestigious something is is not a lever you control.
- BobaFloutist 2y ago
  There absolutely exist skilled scientists that would happily make a living unglamorously replicating studies, if the money was there. Prestige is a nice motivator, but making a living at all is always the baseline, and is often sufficient.
- jimbokun 2y ago
  There needs to be a new norm where prestige and respect is conveyed by having a replicated result. Not just the initial paper.
m_fayer 2y ago
Similarly, ambitious and difficult experiments that don’t pan out should also be richly rewarded. You just did all of science the service of clearly marking that tempting path with a big “don’t bother” sign, thus saving resources and pointing the ship a little closer to the direction of truth.
- creer 2y ago
  Yeah, this is something I don't fully understand. It's work to format and package everything for publication - and it's work which by then may have lost funding since it's failed. And by which time you might be discouraged. BUT like you say all the science has been done, and getting one more serious publication out of it should be rewarding. It's also a chance for the scientist to show that they were serious, competent, diligent in doing the work. It should count as well as a standard publication. It's a chance to collect consulting contracts later. Etc. Management and support should encourage these publications.
creer 2y ago
Haven't you now created an incentive for replication fraud?

bonoboTP 2y ago

> social prestige and respect This one is the showstopper. No matter what you do with rules and regulations, if people aren't impressed by it at a watercooler conversation, or when chatting at a cocktail party at a conference, or when showing a politician around in your lab then nothing else matters. How prestigious something is is not a lever you control.

BobaFloutist 2y ago
There absolutely exist skilled scientists that would happily make a living unglamorously replicating studies, if the money was there. Prestige is a nice motivator, but making a living at all is always the baseline, and is often sufficient.
jimbokun 2y ago
There needs to be a new norm where prestige and respect is conveyed by having a replicated result. Not just the initial paper.

m_fayer 2y ago

Similarly, ambitious and difficult experiments that don’t pan out should also be richly rewarded. You just did all of science the service of clearly marking that tempting path with a big “don’t bother” sign, thus saving resources and pointing the ship a little closer to the direction of truth.

creer 2y ago
Yeah, this is something I don't fully understand. It's work to format and package everything for publication - and it's work which by then may have lost funding since it's failed. And by which time you might be discouraged. BUT like you say all the science has been done, and getting one more serious publication out of it should be rewarding. It's also a chance for the scientist to show that they were serious, competent, diligent in doing the work. It should count as well as a standard publication. It's a chance to collect consulting contracts later. Etc. Management and support should encourage these publications.

creer 2y ago

Haven't you now created an incentive for replication fraud?