Skip to main contentCorrespondencePublished: 10 September 2026Zachary Witkower ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6767-98341,2 Nature Human Behaviour (2026) Cite this articleSave articleView saved researchThe movement for ‘slow science’ argues that the relentless pressure to publish quickly undermines scientific rigour, inflates false positives, and rewards hype over substance. The proposed solution is simple: more time1,2 — longer project horizons, fewer ‘rushed’ outputs, and extended review cycles. This proposal is intuitively reasonable: when people work faster, they tend to make more mistakes (|r| ≈ 0.17)3, which can undermine scientific quality. However, the correlation between work pace and mistakes is smaller than typical effect sizes found in social psychology (|r| ≈ 0.24)4. When considered alongside other familiar correlations — such as the correlation between height and weight (0.22 < r < 0.75)5 — it becomes clear that inferring scientific rigour from research pace is even less sensible than estimating someone’s height with a bathroom scale.Instead, we must promote quality research directly; scientific quality can only be assessed by the substance and contribution of the work, irrespective of whether it was completed in five hours or five years. In fact, there are three reasons why faster science may yield better outcomes than slow science.This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institutionAccess options Access through your institutionAccess Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journalsGet Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription27,99 € / 30 dayscancel any timeLearn moreSubscribe to this journalReceive 12 digital issues and online access to articles118,99 € per yearonly 9,92 € per issueLearn moreBuy this articlePurchase on SpringerLinkInstant access to the full article PDF.39,95 €Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkoutSubjectsHuman behaviourPsychologyReferencesFrith, U. Trends Cogn. Sci. 24, 1–2 (2020).Article PubMed Google Scholar Lutz, J. F. Nat. Chem. 4, 588–589 (2012).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Szalma, J. A., Hancock, P. A. & Quinn, S. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 52, 1513–1516 (2008).Article Google Scholar Lovakov, A. & Agadullina, E. R. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 51, 485–504 (2021).Article Google Scholar Johnson, W. et al. Ann. Hum. Biol. 47, 199–207 (2020).Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Pischel, L., Yildirim, I. & Omer, S. B. Chest 160, e1–e3 (2021).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Saag, M. Physiol. Rev. 102, 1569–1577 (2022).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Download referencesAuthor informationAuthors and AffiliationsDepartment of Psychology, The University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, NetherlandsZachary WitkowerDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USAZachary WitkowerAuthorsZachary WitkowerView author publicationsSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarCorresponding authorCorrespondence to Zachary Witkower.Ethics declarationsRights and permissionsReprints and permissionsAbout this article