This is the subtitle of another blog on the scientific method (and scientific madness).
I don’t agree with the statement – conclusion should be as accurate and as logical as possible. Conclusions should be believed by the authors as they are fraudsters otherwise.
The original paper for the strange hypothesis is by Dang and Bright.
Dang and Bright argue that all this makes sense if we expect the norms governing the presentation of scientific conclusions to scientific peers to align with the reality that science works through division of cognitive labor and collective efforts at error correction.
which is basically not true – see Brandolinis law.