[Calamity]

This would indeed be great, but the impact on one's career of reproducing another's work would have to be equivalent to that of the original publication on the original author's career. Otherwise, nobody will want to spend the time certifying another's work.

Could have this so that it's a multi-stage process where all involved parties become authors on the paper, but this would need a substantial shift in what academia is today.

[woeirua]

That’s exactly what it should be. After author there should be multiple lines for individuals/groups that reproduced that research. Prizes should be divvied amongst original researchers and the first N groups to reproduce it.

Also, I’d love to see the Masters degree become focused on reproducing others work for two years. You do original research in a PhD only.

[fma]

Or...a scientist's reputation can also be bolstered by how many papers they are able to reproduce, or debunk.

Debunking science also brings value to science. The incentivizes of the system needs to change.

As an analogy, performing code review brings value to software development.