Replication, Peer Reviews, and Publish or Perish - Topic Citations

Topic ID: 100

Every citation has two independent 0-100 scores. The source Reliability score rates the general reliability of the outlet itself, regardless of the specific claim, based on an eight-tier scale running from primary government and international scientific bodies (CDC, WHO, NASA, IPCC) at the top, through peer-reviewed journals, wire services, mainstream science journalism, and advocacy organizations, down to tertiary references like Wikipedia and unverifiable or absent sources at the bottom.

The Accuracy score, by contrast, rates how well a specific citation supports topic statements — a citation from an excellent source can score low if misapplied or can score high if it precisely backs up topic statements.

Media ""Crisis"" Framing of Replication Failures Obscures That Self-Correction Is a Sign of Science Working

Replication Crisis Documented in Psychology (Landmark Reproducibility Study)

Replication Crisis Also Documented in Cancer Biology

Negative/""Broken Science"" News Framing Measurably Reduces Public Trust; Self-Correction Is Rarely Mentioned

Publication Bias Favors Statistically Significant and Positive Findings Over Null Results

"Publish or Perish" Career Incentives Are Linked to the Replication Crisis and Questionable Research Practices

P-Hacking and Selective Reporting Are Widespread Questionable Research Practices Driven by Publication Pressure

Peer Review Is Not Infallible - Time Pressure, Conflicts of Interest, and Limited Access to Underlying Data