This is quote from Gelman and King in the Chronicle
The publication process in social science is broken. Articles in prestigious journals use flawed data, employ questionable research practices, and reach illogical conclusions. Sometimes doubts over research become public, such as in the case of honesty scholar Francesca Gino, but most of the time research malpractice goes unacknowledged and uncorrected. Yet scholars know it is there, hiding below the surface, leading to frustration and cynicism. Research “has become a game of publication and not science,” as one professor wrote in response to a survey on research practices.
They want a “replay review” like in professional sports.
Once a publication receives a specified number of citations, it would receive an independent review. These reviews would then be published in full, along with author responses, so that readers have additional guidance on how to interpret the initial publication.
It is an interesting idea – basically a mandatory PubPeer review…