“The study predicts that audits would reduce the number of false positive results from 30.2 per 100 papers to 12.3 per 100—far from perfect, but a significant improvement.
The paper also finds that the auditing process would not be overly burdensome for academics: Each audit would require one extra researcher to review every 10 papers, Barnett says. He says the process might even be useful in weeding out systematic errors and that successful audits could eventually even become an indicator of a lab’s prestige. These researchers could also be paid for their work.”
