Feb 09 2016 Published by under Careers, Life

The only time I've had an issue with replicating someone else's experiments has been with stuff published in glam magz. This is something we're struggling with now. Perhaps we should rename the "replication crisis" the "glam magz crisis".



3 responses so far

  • drugmonkey says:


  • Lymphocyte says:

    That has been my experience as well (as an immunologist). I've found that the first few figures, usually describing an observation, tend to be true and reproducible. Where the paper typically falls apart is with the final few figures describing mechanism. In order to publish in a "glam magz" the paper needs to have some sort of mechanism. Since determining the mechanism is the most difficult and time consuming part, and the labs are under tremendous competitive pressure, the labs tend to take substantial liberties in order to make a sell-able story.

    My experience is that there seems to be an inverse correlation between the size and drive of the lab with how reproducible the data is. Perhaps NIGMS is onto something - limit the size of the labs by limiting the funding.

    , which seems to promote