"Reproducibility: A Tragedy Of Errors"

link

We learned that post-publication peer review is not consistent, smooth or rapid. Many journal editors and staff members seemed unprepared or ill-equipped to investigate, take action or even respond. Too often, the process spiraled through layers of ineffective e-mails among authors, editors and unidentified journal representatives, often without any public statement added to the original article. Some journals that acknowledged mistakes required a substantial fee to publish our letters: we were asked to spend our research dollars on correcting other people's errors.

(Incidentally, compare this to philosophy...in which the standards aren't clear and rigorous enough to make a system for retraction at all feasible.)