<story><title>&apos;Serious errors&apos; in research linking deaths to red meat</title><url>https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/serious-errors-in-research-linking-deaths-to-red-meat-qtdh28fv5</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>drno123</author><text>Every PhD student should, in order to obtain PhD, not only do his original research but reproduce another published result. This will make PhD harder to get, so PhD’s will become more valuable (and more vetted), and we will have people verify published studies.</text></comment>
<story><title>&apos;Serious errors&apos; in research linking deaths to red meat</title><url>https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/serious-errors-in-research-linking-deaths-to-red-meat-qtdh28fv5</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Mountain_Skies</author><text>As the replication crisis grows, or we&amp;#x27;re simply becoming more aware of it, I do wonder how much of this is due to poorly aligned incentives causing researchers to error on the side of what will get the most attention versus researchers in general simply being sloppy. Much discussion has been had on what to do if it is the former but if it is the latter, what needs to change in the education process so studies are better designed to end up with errors so frequently?</text></comment>