What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of: " All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing?" Review uri icon

Overview

MeSH Major

  • Peer Review
  • Periodicals as Topic
  • Plagiarism
  • Scientific Misconduct

abstract

  • Peer review is an essential component of the process that is universally applied prior to the acceptance of a manuscript, grant or other scholarly work. Most of us willingly accept the responsibilities that come with being a reviewer but how comfortable are we with the process? Peer review is open to abuse but how should it be policed and can it be improved? A bad peer review process can inadvertently ruin an individual's career, but are there penalties for policing a reviewer who deliberately sabotages a manuscript or grant? Science has received an increasingly tainted name because of recent high profile cases of alleged scientific misconduct. Once considered the results of work stress or a temporary mental health problem, scientific misconduct is increasingly being reported and proved to be a repeat offence. How should scientific misconduct be handled--is it a criminal offence and subject to national or international law? Similarly plagiarism is an ever-increasing concern whether at the level of the student or a university president. Are the existing laws tough enough? These issues, with appropriate examples, are dealt with in this review.

publication date

  • June 11, 2007

Research

keywords

  • Review

Identity

Language

  • eng

PubMed Central ID

  • PMC1994041

PubMed ID

  • 17583174

Additional Document Info

start page

  • 39

end page

  • 53

volume

  • 3

number

  • 1