Plain English Summary
Think scientists always play by the rules? Think again. This landmark survey anonymously asked over 3,200 US scientists funded by the National Institutes of Health whether they had cut corners in their research. Outright fraud like faking data was rare (under 2%), but the broader picture was eye-opening: a full third admitted to at least one serious questionable practice in just the past three years. Common offenses included changing a study's design because of funding pressure, tossing out data based on a hunch, and sloppy record-keeping. Seasoned scientists were actually worse than newcomers. Because these are self-reported numbers from people admitting to their own bad behavior, the real rates are almost certainly higher. This matters hugely for controversial fields like parapsychology, where pre-registering studies and independent replication are the best defenses against exactly these kinds of shortcuts.
Links
Related Papers
Companion
More in Methodology
Paranormal belief, conspiracy endorsement, and positive wellbeing: a network analysis
Planning Falsifiable Confirmatory Research
Addressing Researcher Fraud: Retrospective, Real-Time, and Preventive Strategies — Including Legal Points and Data Management That Prevents Fraud
Quantum Aspects of the Brain-Mind Relationship: A Hypothesis with Supporting Evidence
Paranormal beliefs and cognitive function: A systematic review and assessment of study quality across four decades of research
📋 Cite this paper
Martinson, Brian C, Anderson, Melissa S, de Vries, Raymond (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/435737a
@article{martinson_2005_scientists_badly,
title = {Scientists behaving badly},
author = {Martinson, Brian C and Anderson, Melissa S and de Vries, Raymond},
year = {2005},
journal = {Nature},
doi = {10.1038/435737a},
}