Wonderfully articulated! So many of us wonder why papers that echo beliefs we already have get frequently published in C, N, S etc. Further the focus on hypothesis framing in grant applications leads many to disregard remarkable experimental designs that may be game changing.
This may be obvious to some but I'm now convinced: fierce competition for grants and papers is leading to low societal ROI (return on investment).
Why, when competition should mean only the best-formulated and executed work is accepted for funding and high-profile publication?