In the New York Times, two co-founders of Retraction Watch ponder examples of scientists caught committing research fraud to gain grants and further their careers. They ask why there’s so little oversight and why it is that so few scientists are ever subjected to stiff penalties of any kind, despite how widespread such fraud is becoming.
Crack Down on Scientific Fraudsters (New York Times, July 10, 2014)
I have seen this retractionwatch online before,
Authors retract paper claiming antidepressants prevent suicide http://retractionwatch.com/2012/03/19/author-retracts-paper-claiming-antidepressants-prevent-suicide/
I’ve seen a talk by these guys at my institute, they basically point out to what is widely discussed among scientists in private: not only that there is widespread fraud but why it is occurring. Well, if there are few incentives to do the right thing and many to commit fraud and on top of that chances of being caught and facing consequences afterwards are scarce – well, that’s what you get.
I believe, maybe unfoundedly, that it looks a tiny bit better in basic science but the whole obsession with impact factors and originality is driving everyone mad.
