Via Real Clear Science:
Partially because of this increasing complexity, however, the scientific literature is littered with papers that cannot be replicated, either because of the good faith efforts of scientists who fail in their attempts to be jacks-of-all-trades or because corners are cut deliberately.
RealClearScience - Solving the Problem of Irreproducible Results
Points:
- “…peer reviewers often do not themselves have the comprehensive expertise to evaluate thoroughly all aspects of a scientific study.”
- “…growing specialization required for the modern scientific enterprise to advance.”
- “…rise of core facilities in the best universities, in which departments intent on recruiting and keeping top scientific talent provide incentives.”
Addressing the issue:
Reproducibility Initiative using Science Exchange as a platform. The initiative has two tracks. First, if they have the funds to pay for the service, researchers may submit findings that they want to have independently replicated, perhaps because of its potential translational or commercial value. Where we have providers with the necessary expertise, we will randomly assign replication studies to them.
Second, as part of a broader, more inclusive survey of reproducibility, we invite authors of recently published papers to nominate their work for independent replication.
