This idea is applicable to many fields, but in the era of the internet, this is a cheap idea that should gain broad acceptance. Academics would benefit from the creation of a journal of failed research. Rather, many journals of failed research, Chemistry, Economics, Biology, Sociology, Finance, etc. There should be buoys in the harbor saying this way does not work; go another way. There would be three salutary effects:
1) Researchers would learn of ideas that don’t work and would avoid them.
2) Researchers would conclude that your process does not work, but they have a better way to proceed and act on it.
3) Academics would get credit for doing honest research, and not twisting research through falsifying data or tweaking formulas in order to get significant coefficients.
It is almost as valuable to know that something doesn’t work, than to know that is does work. How much time could be saved, and new avenues acted on, through journals that record failed research. Who knows, but that it might improve honesty among scientists, if they get credit for publishing failed research that is honest, versus falsifying data or engaging in a specification search in order to tweak coefficients to make them significant.
This would be a big improvement for every academic discipline worth writing about, where data and fair results matter. Let it happen then. I am willing to set up online journals for failed research. Let the submissions begin.