banner
You are not using a standards compliant browser. Because of this you may notice minor glitches in the rendering of this page. Please upgrade to a compliant browser for optimal viewing:
Firefox
Internet Explorer 7
Safari (Mac and PC)
Press Release
US scientists significantly more likely to publish fake research
Tuesday, November 16, 2010


Credit: Jeff Hire
US scientists are significantly more likely to publish fake research than scientists from elsewhere, finds a trawl of officially withdrawn (retracted) studies, published online in the Journal of Medical Ethics.

Fraudsters are also more likely to be "repeat offenders," the study shows.

The study author searched the PubMed database for every scientific research paper that had been withdrawn—and therefore officially expunged from the public record—between 2000 and 2010.

A total of 788 papers had been retracted during this period. Around three quarters of these papers had been withdrawn because of a serious error (545); the rest of the retractions were attributed to fraud (data fabrication or falsification).

The highest number of retracted papers were written by US first authors (260), accounting for a third of the total. One in three of these was attributed to fraud.

The UK, India, Japan, and China each had more than 40 papers withdrawn during the decade. Asian nations, including South Korea, accounted for 30% of retractions. Of these, one in four was attributed to fraud.

The fakes were more likely to appear in leading publications with a high "impact factor." This is a measure of how often research is cited in other peer reviewed journals.

More than half (53%) of the faked research papers had been written by a first author who was a "repeat offender." This was the case in only one in five (18%) of the erroneous papers.

The average number of authors on all retracted papers was three, but some had 10 or more. Faked research papers were significantly more likely to have multiple authors.

Each first author who was a repeat fraudster had an average of six co-authors, each of whom had had another three retractions.

"The duplicity of some authors is cause for concern," comments the author. Retraction is the strongest sanction that can be applied to published research, but currently, "[it] is a very blunt instrument used for offences both gravely serious and trivial."

###

BMJ-British Medical Journal: http://www.bma.org


Thanks to BMJ-British Medical Journal for this article.

This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.



This press release has been viewed 512 time(s).

Comments

Genomic Repairman
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
Tue, Nov 16, 2010, 10:13 am CST

These are US based authors, but are they actually American or other nationalities?  That would be an interesting breakdown.  And lets not let journals from other countries get off the hook, they publish fake stuff and duplicative research.  They just don't retract it.


Will
UC Davis
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
Tue, Nov 16, 2010, 5:57 pm CST

No GR it's only americans... deal with it!

 

 


Brian Krueger, PhD
Duke University
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
Tue, Nov 16, 2010, 7:21 pm CST

Was there no normalization here?  Could it just be that the US has more institutions publishing in "pubmed"-able journals and therefore shares a greater total number of fraud cases but not necessarily a greater percentage.

Creativyst

Guest Comment
Tue, Nov 16, 2010, 7:39 pm CST

Does the study include a breakdown of each nationality's representative percentage in set: "all papers on PubMed between 2000 and 2010"?

 

If the study doesn't include that, Alanis Morissette could learn a lot about irony here.


Prabodh Kandala
Texas Tech University Health Science Center
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
Wed, Nov 17, 2010, 12:54 am CST

I second Brian's thoughts.


JanedeLartigue
UC Davis
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
Wed, Nov 17, 2010, 4:10 pm CST

Brian Krueger, PhD
Duke University
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
Wed, Nov 17, 2010, 4:45 pm CST
I tweeted this one with the headline "stay classy BMJ." Should have the new rating system up this weekend.

JanedeLartigue
UC Davis
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
Wed, Nov 17, 2010, 5:20 pm CST

Awesome!

Add Comment?

For youtube videos, paste embed code directly in the text box

-

Members do not need to provide an address

-
Rate Article
Total votes: 0
Select Comment Validation Method
Member
Name/URL (Guest)
FaceBook (Guest)
Member Commenting:


Authenticate with Facebook before submitting

OR


Make your LabSpaces comments count. Start earning LabSpaces points by becoming a member! Learn more.
Please verify that you are human: Register for LabSpaces
Make your LabSpaces comments count. Start earning LabSpaces points by becoming a member! Learn more.


Please authenticate before trying to post a comment.

If you would like to remain anonymous, please enter a new name and link below


Friends