This week I read about a Nobel winner whose groundbreaking work didn't get funded and got her demoted, and about data fraud by two of the highest profile scientists who were lauded and mega funded. We have to stop rewarding short term flashy work and overproductive scientists.

It's fine and correct to talk about both incentives and individual responsibility. But if we scientists collectively decided to heavily downplay work without open, raw data and reproducible methods, and ignored journal title when evaluating scientists, this couldn't happen.

The system is absolutely broken and needs structural reform, yes. Journals need to go. Competitive grants are the wrong way to fund science. Scientific prizes are very problematic. But we also need to get better at reading and doing science and valuing what works in the long term.

That's the key point. If we let these things happen it means we are doing science badly.