Alfaro-Núñez Alonzo
Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Naestved Hospital, Ringstedgade 57a, 4700 Naestved, Denmark.
Section for Evolutionary Genomics, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, 1353 Copenhagen K, Denmark.
Environ Sci Eur. 2022;34(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s12302-022-00659-3. Epub 2022 Aug 23.
Today, scientists and academic researchers experience an enormous pressure to publish innovative and ground-breaking results in prestigious journals. This pressure may blight the general view concept of how scientific research needs to be done in terms of the general rules of transparency; duplication of data, and co-authorship rights might be compromised. As such, misconduct acts may occur more frequently than foreseen, as frequently these experiences are not openly shared or discussed among researchers.
While there are some concerns about the health and the transparency implications of such normalised pressure practices imposed on researchers in scientific research, there is a general acceptance that researchers must take and accept it in order to survive in the competitive world of science. This is even more the case for junior and mid-senior researchers who have recently started their adventure into the universe of independent researchers. Only the slightest fraction manages to endure, after many years of furious and cruel rivalry, to obtain a long-term, and even less probable, permanent position. There is an evil circle; excellent records of good publications are needed in order to obtain research funding, but how to produce pioneering research during these first years without funding? Many may argue this is a necessary process to ensure good quality scientific investigation, possibly, but perseverance and resilience may not be the only values needed when rejection is received consecutively for years.
There is a general culture that scientists rarely share previous bad experiences, in particular if they were associated to misconduct, as they may not be seen or considered as a relevant or hot topic to the scientific community readers. On next, a recent misconduct experience is shared, and a few additional reflections and suggestions on this topic were drafted in the hope other researchers might be spared unnecessary and unpleasant times.
如今，科学家和学术研究人员面临着巨大的压力，需要在著名期刊上发表创新且具有开创性的成果。这种压力可能会破坏科学研究在透明度一般规则方面应如何进行的普遍观念；数据的重复使用以及共同作者权利可能会受到损害。因此，不当行为可能比预期更频繁地发生，因为这些经历通常不会在研究人员之间公开分享或讨论。
虽然人们对科学研究中施加在研究人员身上的这种常态化压力行为对健康和透明度的影响存在一些担忧，但人们普遍认为，研究人员必须接受并承受这种压力，以便在竞争激烈的科学界生存下去。对于刚踏入独立研究领域的初级和中高级研究人员来说更是如此。只有极少数人能在多年激烈残酷的竞争后，获得一个长期的、甚至更难获得的永久职位。这是一个恶性循环；为了获得研究资金，需要有出色的良好出版物记录，但在最初几年没有资金的情况下如何进行开创性研究呢？许多人可能会说这是确保高质量科学研究的必要过程，也许是这样，但当连续多年收到拒绝时，毅力和适应力可能不是唯一所需的品质。
科学界普遍存在一种现象，即科学家很少分享以前的不良经历，特别是如果这些经历与不当行为有关，因为他们可能不被科学界读者视为相关或热门话题。接下来，分享一次最近的不当行为经历，并就这个话题起草了一些额外的思考和建议，希望其他研究人员能避免不必要的不愉快时光。
