Format

Send to

Choose Destination
F1000Res. 2014 May 28;3:119. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.3714.1. eCollection 2014.

New forms of checks and balances are needed to improve research integrity.

Author information

1
Science Exchange Inc., 555 Bryant Street, #939, Palo Alto, CA, 94301-1704, USA.
2
Department of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, 1550 4th St #546A, San Francisco, CA, 94158-2324, USA.

Abstract

Recent attempts at replicating highly-cited peer-reviewed studies demonstrate that the "reproducibility crisis" is indeed upon us. However, punitive measures against individuals committing research misconduct are neither sufficient nor useful because this is a systemic issue stemming from a lack of positive incentive. As an alternative approach, here we propose a system of checks and balances for the publishing process that involves 1) technical review of methodology by publishers, and 2) incentivizing direct replication of key experimental results. Together, these actions will help restore the self-correcting nature of scientific discovery.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for F1000 Research Ltd Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center