What can we do about the tendency of research articles to get their big flash of publicity before undergoing peer review?
The whole publish-or-perish culture is a disaster that incentivizes cheating.
It should be considered just as valuable to have a few grad students working on replication as on original research, and that should not hurt the students' prospects.
This should be the work of grad students, not cranking out another paper or slaving for professors.
> We should also demand publication of failures -- it's ok to fail, but only if you publish about the failure.
I really want to have a journal that just publishes interesting duds. Someone else might look at your methodology and get their own idea.
> This should be the work of grad students, not cranking out another paper or slaving for professors.
But the professors need to arrange for this.
some charismatic, intelligent dude or dudette or couple with a curious but rather uneducated mind inviting grad students and scientists to discuss studies and pre-prints and so on, constantly babbling scientifically more or less correct nonsense but getting semantically corrected by the guests or something ... ... so viewers can feel "smartypants" and or relate and learn.
I'm sure there's podcasts but I don't listen to podcasts.