As we embark on a new year of research, it seems fitting to reflect upon recent concerns about the fraud in science. While the Wall Street Journal article admits the possibility that we have simply become better at detecting fraud in science, it also highlights a number of cases of deliberate research dishonesty. This raises several questions about the structure of academic incentives. Given that we live in a world with dishonest folks, do we need higher professional rewards for replication of studies (i.e. more monitoring)? Do we need a "tough on fraud" regime shift in academia? Or is more disclosure the answer?
