Advice to scientists who want to publish papers with fraudulent data

Dr. Fraudulent knows he's a fake doctor, 
and he wants to help you!

Dear Dr. Fraudman,
I’m a scientist and I need to get noticed. I don’t want to spend all those pesky hours actually doing real experiments. How can I get published?
- Dr. Lazyman


Dear “Doc,”
You’re in luck. If you want to publish and your data is fraudulent, there’s a study in The Journal of Medical Ethics that can help. (I find it’s a good idea to read ethics journals to discover who’s been successful at breaching ethical boundaries. Learn from the best!)

First, only publish in journals that are successful and have a high impact in your field. It may seem counterintuitive to only go after the big journals. You might be thinking - wouldn’t it be easier to get published in the smaller journals? But that’s small-minded thinking. If you want to rob a bank, steal from a bank that has all the money!

Don’t be discouraged if your paper doesn’t get published. Keep trying! The more work you have published, the better for you. Remember, more readers read the original article than the retractions published later.

If your paper is challenged by some pesky scientist who bothers looking at the data (which you know is all fake, anyway), there are three words for you: delay, delay, delay! Don’t just roll over and admit you were wrong. Try to delay retracting your paper as long as possible.

Finally, never publish a paper with you as the only author. If it’s only you, and you’re caught, it’s only you! Instead, have as many authors as possible. That way you can point to others as possible culprits and deflect responsibility, which furthers the strategy of delay, delay, delay!

I know I've helped. You're welcome.
-  Dr. Fraudman.


Fraud in Scientific Literature Appears Intentional, Doctor’s Lounge>>

Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud? Journal of Medical Ethics>>
Abstract: “Papers retracted for fraud (data fabrication or data falsification) may represent a deliberate effort to deceive, a motivation fundamentally different from papers retracted for error. It is hypothesised that fraudulent authors target journals with a high impact factor (IF), have other fraudulent publications, diffuse responsibility across many co-authors, delay retracting fraudulent papers and publish from countries with a weak research infrastructure.”

“This study reports evidence consistent with the ‘deliberate fraud’ hypothesis. The results suggest that papers retracted because of data fabrication or falsification represent a calculated effort to deceive. It is inferred that such behaviour is neither naïve, feckless nor inadvertent.”

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Related Posts with Thumbnails