Scientific misconduct: the dark side of science

被引:12
作者
Carafoli, Ernesto [1 ]
机构
[1] Venetian Inst Mol Med, Padua, Italy
关键词
Misconduct; Fraud; Plagiarism; Statistical analysis; Retractions;
D O I
10.1007/s12210-015-0415-4
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Misconduct in science has always occurred, but has increased dramatically in recent times. A number of reasons have contributed to the phenomenon: the enormous expansion of the population of researchers not accompanied by an equivalent increase of the funds available; the explosive development of research in new geographical areas in which research was quantitatively minor until a few years ago; the proliferation of predatory open access Journals that publish articles without analysis of their merit provided that the Authors agree to the payment of frequently substantial publication fees; the faulty use of statistical analysis of the results, which affects predominantly the biological-medical research in which research variability is intrinsically present. All these reasons have had a role, but the most important among them is the "publish or perish" atmosphere that has now pervaded science, in which publishing a high profile paper is the factor that decides whether a researcher will have a successful career or is forced out of science. A number of technical measures are now increasingly trying to ameliorate the situation, however, only the end of the unhealthy scrambling to publish at all costs, and to do so in the high profile journals that now dominate the world of science will heal it completely and conclusively.
引用
收藏
页码:369 / 382
页数:14
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   Data integrity, reliability and fraud in medical research [J].
Baerlocher, Mark Otto ;
O'Brien, Jeremy ;
Newton, Marshall ;
Gautam, Tina ;
Noble, Jason .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2010, 21 (01) :40-45
[2]   Six red flags for suspect work [J].
Begley, C. Glenn .
NATURE, 2013, 497 (7450) :433-434
[3]   Raise standards for preclinical cancer research [J].
Begley, C. Glenn ;
Ellis, Lee M. .
NATURE, 2012, 483 (7391) :531-533
[4]   Who's Afraid of Peer Review? [J].
Bohannon, John .
SCIENCE, 2013, 342 (6154) :60-65
[5]  
Broad W., 1982, Betrayers of the truth: Fraud and deceit in the halls of science
[6]   A bizarre case of scientific fraud [J].
Carafoli, Ernesto .
BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS, 2013, 441 (03) :529-530
[7]   Retraction rates are on the rise [J].
Cokol, Murat ;
Ozbay, Fatih ;
Rodriguez-Esteban, Raul .
EMBO REPORTS, 2008, 9 (01) :2-2
[8]   How many scientific papers should be retracted? [J].
Cokol, Murat ;
Iossifov, Ivan ;
Rodriguez-Esteban, Raul ;
Rzhetsky, Andrey .
EMBO REPORTS, 2007, 8 (05) :422-423
[9]  
De Solla Price D., 1963, Little Science, Big Science
[10]  
Eastwood Susan, 1996, Sci Eng Ethics, V2, P89, DOI 10.1007/BF02639320