Instructors/lecturers and fellows/residents were five times more likely to commit scientific fraud in the past five years compared to full professors, according to new research published Friday.
Academics working in more corrupt countries also more frequently reported suspecting or witnessing such actions, which can include fabrication, falsification or plagiarism. Meanwhile, researchers over 65 or located in less corrupt countries were significantly less likely to experience fraud among their departmental colleagues, researchers wrote in the European Journal of Radiology [1].
The findings—derived from survey data on scientific integrity—underline the importance of educating early career radiologists about ethics and the negative consequences of shoddy research.
“The higher frequency of scientific fraud among junior faculty also reemphasizes the need for society and the scientific community to reflect on the current academic reward system,” Thomas C. Kwee, MD, PhD, with the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands, and colleagues wrote May 19. As constructed, this system “pressures researchers to acquire a high number of impactful publications (that are usually required to be both novel and to yield positive results) and to bring in a lot of money through research grants, which may act as incentives to commit fraud.”
For the study, researchers analyzed survey data on scientific integrity, completed by nearly 900 corresponding authors who published imaging research in 2021. The information spanned four previous surveys conducted in the fields of general radiology, nuclear medicine, cardiovascular imaging and neuroradiology. Kwee et al. also measured the degree to which various variables, such as age and gender, influenced a researcher’s chance of experiencing fraud.
Of the final sample, 4.2% of survey participants (37 individuals) said they had committed scientific fraud in the past five years. Another 25.4% (223) witnessed or suspected their departmental colleagues had committed such actions. Scientists over 65 were less likely to witness fraud compared to those between 35 and 44 years old. That’s likely because researchers in this age bracket are likely retired and have little to no role in the department, the authors speculated.
Kwee and colleagues believe their findings also highlight the role lawmakers may have in addressing this issue.
“Our results reinforce the necessity for countries to take measures against both corruption and scientific fraud. Science can be regarded as a vital means for countries and human society as a whole to develop, and the degree of corruption in a country and scientific fraud appear to be correlated,” the study noted. “Finally, more research is necessary to understand why certain medical imaging researchers decide to engage in scientific fraud and under which circumstances.”
Read more about the investigation, including potential limitations, in EJR below.
Marty Stempniak has covered healthcare since 2012, with his byline appearing in the American Hospital Association's member magazine, Modern Healthcare and McKnight's. Prior to that, he wrote about village government and local business for his hometown newspaper in Oak Park, Illinois. He won a Peter Lisagor and Gold EXCEL awards in 2017 for his coverage of the opioid epidemic.