
pmid: 24239011
pmc: PMC4959568
Wagenmakers and Forstmann argue that journals (and journal editors) should actively solicit replication attempts to confirm important findings (Wagenmakers & Forstmann, 2013). They point out, correctly in our opinion, that current incentive structures in science discourage scientists from adopting practices that are advantageous for science as a whole, because they leave individual scientists disadvantaged relative to their peers. Replication is one example of this, although there are others, such as the general lack of enthusiasm for publishing null results. Much of this arises from the current “publish or perish” culture within science.
Publishing, Motivation, name=Brain and Behaviour, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, /dk/atira/pure/core/keywords/tobacco_and_alcohol, name=Tobacco and Alcohol, /dk/atira/pure/core/keywords/brain_and_behaviour
Publishing, Motivation, name=Brain and Behaviour, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, /dk/atira/pure/core/keywords/tobacco_and_alcohol, name=Tobacco and Alcohol, /dk/atira/pure/core/keywords/brain_and_behaviour
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 5 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
