This may just tell us that smokers who don't move to vaping don't do so because they believe it to be more harmful than smoking. Those that know vaping is less harmful move to vaping, leaving a select group of smokers. It does not show evidence of a change in opinion as suggested by the article.

Read about recent developments in measuring uptake in open science practices here: theplosblog.plos.org/2024/10/open...

This is a shame, since open science practices can be measured and provide a much better gauge of quality than the impact factor of journals researchers choose to publish in.

I wonder how many journals without dedicated ethics teams reported fraudulent submissions 🤔

I'm not a lab-based biologist though - I spent my PhD being unable to replicate previous results of psychology experiments in rats. These were technical and conceptual replications (if a technical replication is ever possible). 3/3

If it fails, this could be because A) we have a poor understanding of the mechanism or B) there was a very specific issue with the original experiment. If we only do conceptual replications we won't be able to disentangle A and B. 2/n