Bug bounty: Pay researchers to spot errors in published papers

[WaitWaitWha]

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-01465-y

[sedtacet]

the first published error report of the project (Estimating the Reliability and Robustness of Research, ERROR), on Wessel, J. (2018). Prepotent motor activity and inhibitory control demands in different variants of the go/no-go paradigm), including an author response, can be found here: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8gtz2

[chrisjj]

> ... the science community should reward the detection and correction of errors in the scientific literature.

Sounds like an effective way to reward the creation of same.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive

[sedtacet → chrisjj]

I agree that unintended consequences should always be a concern. The author seems open to discussion about this (I want to start a conversation about the need for dedicated investment in error detection and correction. There are alternatives to bug bounties — for instance, making error detection its own viable career path and hiring full-time scientific staff to check each institute’s papers.).