Scientific research often suffers from questionable practices like selective reporting and publication bias, which undermine its reliability. While solutions like pre-registration and replication studies exist, they aren't widely adopted due to systemic inertia and misaligned incentives. One way to address this could be a coordinated effort to realign academic incentives with truth-seeking, making rigorous research more rewarding.

Realigning Incentives for Better Science

The core idea involves promoting existing best practices while creating new incentives for reproducibility. For example:

• Scaling up registered reports and open data through advocacy and infrastructure support
• Developing career advancement metrics that value robustness over novelty
• Creating funding programs specifically for replication studies

This could work by engaging key stakeholders - journals might pilot "badges" for open practices, while funding agencies could reward reproducible research. Early-career researchers, who face publication pressure but are often more open to reform, might be particularly receptive to such changes.

From Pilot to Wider Adoption

A minimal viable approach could start with psychology journals implementing mandatory pre-registration for certain studies. If successful, this could expand to other disciplines by:

• Developing user-friendly platforms to lower adoption barriers
• Using pilot results to advocate for broader policy changes
• Involving senior academics as champions of the reform movement

The project would differ from existing initiatives like Registered Reports or Open Science Framework by combining technical solutions with systemic incentive changes, addressing both how reforms are implemented and why researchers should adopt them.

By making rigorous research more rewarding and easier to conduct, this approach could help shift academic culture toward greater transparency and reliability.