Fear of being scooped is fuelling the replication crisis in research

Back-to-back publication reinforces findings, and preprints could facilitate it. So why are journals still so wary of it, asks Josh Hardy 

Published on
July 8, 2021
Last updated
November 3, 2021
Vintage image of two men in tracksuits standing back to back holding guns illustrating opinion about back-to-back publication
Source: Getty montage

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (1)

Thanks Josh, a very nice example of a pretty common problem, and fortunately in this case the two groups were so collegial as to agree to coordinate publication attempts. I guess it is not always so because this solution almost inevitably requires a delay in the "fastest" group's submission -- and, who knows, there might be a third group with the same solution. And of interest is the revelation (as if it's needed) of the apparent stochastic nature of the review outcomes which seems, from this report, to indicate (as if it's needed) obstinacy at editorial level. But of course we always think that on rejection! However while I like pre-pubs., I am not sure of their beneficial effects in such cases, these might just bump the problem one notch upstream.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT