Iorns Elizabeth, Chong Christin
Science Exchange Inc., 555 Bryant Street, #939, Palo Alto, CA, 94301-1704, USA.
Department of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, 1550 4th St #546A, San Francisco, CA, 94158-2324, USA.
F1000Res. 2014 May 28;3:119. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.3714.1. eCollection 2014.
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.
近期对高被引同行评审研究进行复制的尝试表明，“可重复性危机”确实已经降临到我们头上。然而，对从事研究不端行为的个人采取惩罚措施既不充分也无济于事，因为这是一个源于缺乏积极激励的系统性问题。作为一种替代方法，我们在此提出一种针对出版过程的制衡系统，该系统包括：1）出版商对方法进行技术评审；2）激励对关键实验结果进行直接复制。这些举措共同作用，将有助于恢复科学发现的自我纠错特性。
