# Is scientific reform an unwinnable arms race?

## TL;DR

Scientific reforms meant to improve research quality are instead leading to more low-quality studies due to the pressure to publish.

## Contribution

The paper raises a critical question about the unintended consequences of methodological improvements in science.

## Key findings

- Methodological improvements are being misused for the sake of publication rather than knowledge advancement.
- The pressure to publish is undermining the intended benefits of scientific reforms.

## Abstract

Improvements to scientific methods and approaches should, in theory, mean more robust evidence and inference, and more rapid advances in knowledge. In practice, they have led to an increasing number of poor-quality studies. Can we break this cycle?

Methodological improvements should, in theory, mean more robust evidence and inference, and more rapid advances in knowledge. However, these methods are often subsequently used in the pursuit of publication for the sake of publication, rather than in the pursuit of knowledge. Can we break this cycle?