Jeremy stated

luckily, in science, it doesn't matter if I or you are conscientious, what matters is that we publish and share our findings. over time, those findings will either be used and shown useful or not, or forgotten. most research on human behaviour is only reproducible in the abstract and then likely only in statistical relations. reproducibility as such is not what makes something science or scientific, or even worthwhile. in fact, i'd argue that finding a reproducible thing... most of the time has nothing to do with science per se, but quite alot more to do with organizational theory, but that's a whole other set of arguments. well then we'll leave at this ; I got a deja-vu feeling from this dialogue, it's eerily reminiscent of the clash between the viewpoints of the 70's and 90's in psychiatric research. I considered some points self-evident because of the historical outcome in my field but I suppose other viewpoints can be useful as well in other fields. I don't have this option where I stand. Nor would I like using this line of thought, come to think of it.

George