Many results that are published in academic journals are not replicable, or excuse me, do not replicate when actually tested. To really vet a paper requires a ton of work and it's much more work than we expect referees to do. We don't have a good sense of what is worth reproducing because most things never get published. The E-Book project aims to bring resources to bear to encourage people to do these kinds of checking.
Psychologist Adam Mastroianni says peer review has failed. Papers with major errors make it through the process. The ones without errors often fail to replicate. One approach to improve the process is better incentives. But Mastroianni argues that peer review isn't fixable. It's a failed experiment. Listen as he makes the case to EconTalk host Russ Roberts for a new approach to science and academic research.