[somethingsome]

IMO, stopping the race toward better h index.

There is an huge amount of pressure to publish publish publish.

So, many researchers prefeer to write very simple things that are probably true or applicative work, which is kind of useful, or publish false/fake results.

[guerby]

May be try to define a "reproducible" h-index, ie your publication doesn't count or count less until a different team has reproduced your results, the team doing the reproducing work gets some points to.

(And may be add more points if in order to reproduce you didn't have to ask plenty of questions to the original team, ie the original paper didn't omit essential information)

[somethingsome]

The thing is, that would encourage two teams to cheat together, it would displace the problem, I'm not sure it will limit the effect that much (?)

[somethingsome]

I'm curious, I don't get why the down votes? Having to race for publishing pushes people to cheat, It didn't occur to me that it was a bad point, but if you have a different opinion I would gladly hear!

[southernplaces7]

> I don't get why the down votes?

Because a great many who comment on this site are infantile but self-congratulating idiots who just can't help themselves on downvoting anything that doesn't fit their pet dislikes. That button should be removed or at least made not to grey-out text.