Fraud in science (Introduction)

by David Turell @, Monday, January 07, 2013, 14:01 (4128 days ago)

Be careful what you read and assume is correct:-http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32687/title/Fraud-Breeds-Retractions/ -"Scientific misconduct contributes to more retractions than previously realized, according to a new analysis published today (October 1) in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Using retractions indexed in Pubmed, researchers found that fabrication, falsification, and duplication led to more retractions than error or plagiarism.
"Tracking down these corrections and retractions to find out what is going on is really innovative," said David Resnik, a bioethicist at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, who did not participate in the research. It turns out that "a high percentage of time, there really some kind of misconduct" behind retractions."

Fraud in science

by David Turell @, Wednesday, May 01, 2013, 19:59 (4014 days ago) @ David Turell

Possible fraud in social psychology. Results are not reproducible:-http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=disputed-results-a-fresh-blow-for-social-psychology

Fraud in science

by David Turell @, Friday, May 03, 2013, 21:04 (4012 days ago) @ David Turell

More statistics on scientific research fraud. Frightening:-http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/talking-back/2013/05/02/spring-and-scientific-fraud-is-busting-out-all-over/?WT_mc_id=SA_DD_20130503

Fraud in science

by David Turell @, Sunday, May 05, 2013, 15:47 (4010 days ago) @ David Turell

Fraud in science;more retractions 2014

by David Turell @, Wednesday, January 21, 2015, 20:36 (3384 days ago) @ David Turell

It just continues and continues:-http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/41777/title/The-Top-10-Retractions-of-2014/

Fraud in science

by David Turell @, Wednesday, January 28, 2015, 14:09 (3377 days ago) @ David Turell

Another review of the problem:-http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-new-scientific-revolution-reproducibility-at-last/2015/01/27/ed5f2076-9546-11e4-927a-4fa2638cd1b0_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines&wpmm=1-"But Ivan Oransky, founder of the blog Retraction Watch, says data-sharing isn't enough. The incentive structure in science remains a problem, because there is too much emphasis on getting published in top journals, he said. Science is competitive, funding is hard to get and tenure harder, and so even an honest researcher may wind up stretching the data to fit a publishable conclusion. -"“Everything in science is based on publishing a peer-reviewed paper in a high-ranking journal. Absolutely everything,” Oransky said. “You want to get a grant, you want to get promoted, you want to get tenure. That's how you do it. That's the currency of the realm.”"

Fraud in science; retraction watch 2015

by David Turell @, Friday, January 01, 2016, 14:49 (3039 days ago) @ David Turell

Published by The Scientist:-http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/44895/title/The-Top-10-Retractions-of-2015/-Comment: Speaks for itself. At least it results in fines and payback of grant money in some cases.

RSS Feed of thread
powered by my little forum