Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Joachim Boldt (Germany), an anesthesiologist formerly based at the Justus Liebig University Giessen, was stripped of his professorship and criminally investigated for forgery in his research studies. [17] As of 2024, Boldt has had 220 of his research publications retracted, and 10 others have received an expression of concern. [18] [19]
Examples include the case of Gerald Schatten who co-authored with Hwang Woo-Suk, the case of Professor Geoffrey Chamberlain named as guest author of papers fabricated by Malcolm Pearce, [48] (Chamberlain was exonerated from collusion in Pearce's deception) [49] – and the coauthors with Jan Hendrik Schön at Bell Laboratories.
In scientific inquiry and academic research, data fabrication is the intentional misrepresentation of research results. As with other forms of scientific misconduct, it is the intent to deceive that marks fabrication as unethical, and thus different from scientists deceiving themselves. There are many ways data can be fabricated.
At the conclusion of this or any research involving deception, all participants must be told of the true nature of the study and why deception was necessary (this is called debriefing). Moreover, it is customary to offer to provide a summary of the results to all participants at the conclusion of the research.
Among those that rejected the paper are journals published by PLOS (PLOS ONE), MDPI (Cancer) and Hindawi (Chemotherapy Research and Practice, ISRN Oncology). The peer review provided by PLOS ONE was reported to be the most rigorous of all, and it was the only journal that identified the paper's ethical problems , for example the lack of ...
Deception: Deceive participants about one or more aspects of the research to conceal the research hypothesis. Post-experimental questionnaires: For example, Rubin (2016) discusses the Perceived Awareness of the Research Hypothesis (PARH). [6] [7] This 4-item scale is usually presented at the end of a research session. In responding to the scale ...
Some scholars classify cherry-picking as a fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias. [3] Cherry picking can refer to the selection of data or data sets so a study or survey will give desired, predictable results which may be misleading or even completely contrary to reality. [4]
An example of school exam cheating, a type of academic dishonesty. Academic dishonesty, academic misconduct, academic fraud and academic integrity are related concepts that refer to various actions on the part of students that go against the expected norms of a school, university or other learning institution.