![Sample our Bioscience journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5925/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Bioscience.jpg"})
Abstract
We analyzed 40 cases of falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism (FFP), comparing them to other types of wrongdoing in research (n = 40) and medicine (n = 40). Fifty-one variables were coded from an average of 29 news or investigative reports per case. Financial incentives, oversight failures, and seniority correlate significantly with more serious instances of FFP. However, most environmental variables were nearly absent from cases of FFP and none were more strongly present in cases of FFP than in other types of wrongdoing. Qualitative data suggest FFP involves thinking errors, poor coping with research pressures, and inadequate oversight. We offer recommendations for education, institutional investigations, policy, and further research.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Pamela Amsler and Tessa Gauzy for assistance with data management, and Michelle Eggers, Elena Kraus, Andrew Plunk, and Meghan Vasher for contributing research to some cases included in this paper.
This paper was supported by grants UL1RR024992 and 1R21RR026313 from the NIH-National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), UL1TR000448 from the National Center for Translational Science, and a seed grant from the BF Charitable Foundation.