Toxicology & Diseases Group, Pharmaceutical Sciences Research Center (PSRC), The Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (TIPS), and Department of Toxicology & Pharmacology, School of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Daru. 2020 Jun;28(1):359-369. doi: 10.1007/s40199-020-00332-1. Epub 2020 Feb 19.
In the new era of publication, scientific misconduct has become a focus of concern including extreme variability of plagiarism, falsification, fabrication, authorship issues, peer review manipulation, etc. Along with, overarching theme of "retraction" and "predatory journals" have emphasized the importance of studying related infrastructures.
Information used in this review was provided through accessing various databases as Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Nature Index, Publication Ethics and Retraction Watch. Original researches, expert opinions, comments, letters, editorials, books mostly published between 2010 and 2020 were gathered and categorized into three sections of "Common types of misconduct"," Reasons behind scientific misconduct" and "Consequences". Within each part, remarkable examples from the past 10 years cited in Retraction Watch are indicated. At last, possible solution on combating misconduct are suggested.
The number of publications are on the dramatic rise fostering a competition under which scholars are pushed to publish more. Consequently, due to several reasons including poor linguistic and illustration skills, not adequate evaluation, limited experience, etc. researchers might tend toward misbehavior endangering the health facts and ultimately, eroding country, journal/publisher, and perpetrator's creditability. The reported incident seems to be enhanced by the emergence of predatory with publishing about 8 times more papers in 2014 than which is in 2010. So that today, 65.3% of paper retraction is solely attributing to misconduct, with plagiarism at the forefront. As well, authorship issues and peer-review manipulation are found to have significant contribution besides further types of misconduct in this duration.
Given the expansion of the academic competitive environment and with the increase in research misconduct, the role of any regulatory sector, including universities, journals/publishers, government, etc. in preventing this phenomenon must be fully focused and fundamental alternation should be implemented in this regard.
在新的出版时代，科学不端行为已成为关注焦点，包括剽窃、伪造、捏造、作者身份问题、同行评审操纵等极端变化。与此同时，“撤稿”和“掠夺性期刊”的首要主题强调了研究相关基础设施的重要性。
本综述中使用的信息是通过访问各种数据库获得的，如 Google Scholar、Web of Science、Scopus、PubMed、Nature Index、出版伦理和撤稿观察。收集了 2010 年至 2020 年期间发表的原始研究、专家意见、评论、信件、社论、书籍等，并将其分为“常见的不端行为类型”、“科学不端行为的背后原因”和“后果”三个部分。在每个部分中，都引用了过去 10 年撤稿观察中提到的显著例子。最后，提出了打击不当行为的可能解决方案。
出版物数量呈急剧上升趋势，学者们在竞争中被迫发表更多的论文。因此，由于语言和插图技能较差、评估不足、经验有限等原因，研究人员可能倾向于不端行为，危害健康事实，最终侵蚀国家、期刊/出版商和肇事者的信誉。由于掠夺性期刊的出现，报告的事件似乎有所增加，2014 年发表的论文比 2010 年增加了 8 倍。因此，今天，65.3%的论文撤稿完全归因于不当行为，其中剽窃占首位。此外，在这段时间内，还发现了作者身份问题和同行评审操纵以及其他类型的不当行为的显著贡献。
鉴于学术竞争环境的扩大和研究不端行为的增加，包括大学、期刊/出版商、政府等在内的任何监管部门在预防这一现象方面的作用必须得到充分关注，并应在这方面进行根本性的改变。
