"Scientific-misconduct accusations are leading to retractions [...] But there’s no telling how widespread errors are in research: As it is, they’re largely brought to light by unpaid volunteers.
A program launching this month is hoping to shake up that incentive structure [...It] will pay reviewers to root out mistakes in influential papers,"
@erinnacland@academicchatter "Errors" in research is a broad category, with no single definition. This seems more like a vigilante justice approach to an epistemic problem that started with poor training, was boosted by problems with how IF affects the reputation of single articles, and then reinforced by institutional administrations looking to hire "stars". I say this as someone who's main research is concerned by re-evaluating theory (in ecology).