Why is scientific fraud not taken seriously?

"Institutions may be reluctant to accept that someone is fraudulent if that person occupies a high-ranking role [...] Publishers may be reluctant to retract papers unless there is an institutional finding of misconduct, even if there is clear evidence"

@ElisabethBik "noted that 60-70% of the 800 papers she had reported to journals had not been dealt with within 5 years."

By @deevybee deevybee.blogspot.com/2022/12/ #OpenScience #Science @academicchatter

Follow

@erinnacland @ElisabethBik @deevybee @academicchatter sadly I think only a few people care and don't have enough prestige to be taken seriously. Plagiarism and duplicate works will end when publishers enforce something like YouTube's copyright strike when part of the revenue goes to the original creator/publisher. I don't know if that will ever exist, but I do know that there's a lot of effort to prevent plagiarism, perhaps to prevent large copyright claims. But completely fabricated papers will be harder to detect. I've seen blots manipulated by image edition software, at the time of running the SDS page, or at developing the film with a piece of cardboard, or even stealing someone else's film with the same number of samples. Transparency will help, but will not eliminate the problem.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.