We argue that publishing direct replication articles in top-ranking journals is one important avenue for self-correction. We consider the current prevalence rate – 0.2% – to be alarmingly low. However, others will disagree with us. (6/9)

Of course, our estimate of direct replication articles provides only one indicator of how much the field values and incentivises this type of self-correction (other indicators like funding and the impact of replications are also relevant to consider). (7/9)