Research Cheaters: Dishonesty in Research  

This article is intended for both researchers and the general public, emphasizing that while there are many cheaters in the world, they are not exclusively involved in criminal activities. Those who do dishonesty in the research are the real cheaters, and I can say they are the research cheaters. The research cheater not only causes havoc in the world, but also destroys education levels. Research cheaters disseminate false information to the world and transfer incorrect knowledge from one generation to the next, which is a form of dishonesty. We must verify the knowledge and the quality of each researcher’s work. We hope that in the future, the researcher community will take measurements to identify research cheaters.

Research Cheaters: Dishonesty in Research

The Role of the Famous Professor

The article, “Trade openness and CO2 emanations: a heterogeneous analysis on the developing eight (D8) countries,” published on April 13, 2021, tells the story of professor Dr. Vo Xuan Vinch, who is well-known among the Vietnamese people and has gained international recognition as a scientist. The research of the Almas Heshmati of Jönköping University in Sweden, there was no justification by the author to describe the he had done in his research, even he had not provided the data populate of the thousand cell.

USA Government Provide the Funds

The United States government allocated 471 billion dollars to support academic research. The majority of the work involves errors, polarization, and fraudulent activities. Some of the reputed universities and research centers are Harvard University, Columbia University, the Dana Farber Cancer Institute, and Stanford University. If anything occurs in the realm of academia, it can be considered a crime or misconduct by readers. The human research protections provide guidance, education, and clarification about the human research subject. The FDA plays a role in fraud prevention and detection. If fraud occurs, the joint committee will investigate and then take action on the research.

USA Government Provide the Funds

The Role of the Paper Mills: Support the Research cheaters   

The Scottish Medical Journal has retracted a number of papers. Paper mills were responsible for producing these articles. This is the business where journals publish fake papers, sell authorship, and show the authors’ contributions to the journal. The thousands of papers reported by Nature were from paper mills, and they belong to China, Russia, and Iran. The paper mills organization produces papers for authors seeking promotion and grants. This practice is unethical as it has the potential to lead and misguide academics and young researchers.

The Role of the Paper Mills: Support the Research cheaters   

Sources: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.1574

The report of the Kassel University Press was the target of many journals to know about the fake publication, but it was shocking that the international journal of emerging technologies in learning published 100 articles. This was the involvement of the journal editors. In the majority of cases, the guest editor was also responsible for initiating the fake publication. Most of the papers published with the author’s name did not contribute to the article. Elsevier, Oxford University Press, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wolters Kluwer, and Wiley-Blackwell publish this intriguing paper. The majority of the publishers initiated their investigations on April 6, 2022.

In 2024, What Was The Fate Of Research Cheaters?

The Wall Street Journal’s report revealed that a fraudulent publication had an impact on Willy. The Wall Street Journal retracted more than 10,000 papers in May,2024. The majority of the individuals involved in these retracted papers are from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. This is due to the paper mills and those who just put the name, and people sell their work to people who want just the name on the paper. Most of the problematic papers were linked to Hindawi. The paper mills are perpetrating fraud and publishing fake data.

In 2024, What Was The Fate Of Research Cheaters?

Figure source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.1574

The Role of the International Publisher (LLC) to support research cheaters?

What a promising beginning for the website that buys and sells manuscripts! Researchers or individuals can use these facilities to publish their research papers in databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and others. They are also offering the option of co-authorship; just send the money and email, and they will include your name in the article. Their slogan is “We guarantee publication.” Finally, they offer the service of identifying an appropriate coauthor for your article. To learn more, visit the website using the provided link below.

http://buy-sell-article.com/coauthorship.php#banner

Figure: Number of purchased co-authorship slots by country Prepared by Anna Abalkina (https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1574)
Figure: Number of purchased co-authorship slots by country Prepared by Anna Abalkina (https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1574)

ChatGPT and Peer Reviewed Process

Artificial intelligence has significantly contributed to the research field. ChatGPT, Bard, and other artificial intelligence tools are influencing the research field. The literature review typically utilizes artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT and Bard. What would happen if the researchers used these tools for their own research? This is due to the potential benefits they could receive from the peer review process. The author provides the name of the person responsible for the evolution of the paper. This is biased because most of the time people give the name of the evaluator’s close friend or someone who may be in their circle. Therefore, they provide favorable feedback, leading to the acceptance of the paper. Another startling fact is that the research article evaluator requires you to cite my paper in your own work. This is a form of intellectual arrogance; it represents a mutually beneficial exchange. The author takes advantage of publication, and the evaluator takes advantage of the citation. 

ChatGPT and Peer Reviewed Process

AI generated image and Medical science

It is amazing that the researchers are using Midjourney for the image; these images look real. This is Xinyu Guo et al.’s paper, Cellular Functions of Spermatogonial Stem Cells in Relation to the JAK/STAT Signaling Pathway, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 2024, DOI 10.3389/fcell.2023.1339390. The AI-generated picture has now forced the removal of this paper. The blog title, “The Rat with the Big Balls and the Enormous Penis—how Frontiers Published a Paper with Botched AI-Generated Images,” comes from the eliesbik. AnothThe title of another paper is “Target receptor identification and subsequent treatment of resected brain tumors with encapsulated and engineered allogeneic stem cells.” The image in this paper is a copy from another paThis is unethical for the researcher to use. Stokel-Walker expressed concerns about ChatGPT’s author listing and provided examples of several medical journals in nursing and oncology where ChatGPT appears as an author.

AI generated image and Medical science

Researchers Keep Updated About the Publications

There are a few websites that keep researchers updated about new patterns in research and changes in the field.

Research Integrity scienceintegritydigest.com/

For Better Science (https://forbetterscience.com/)

 Image Integrity (https://image-integrity.com/)

Retraction Watch (https://retractionwatch.com/)

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

(https://publicationethics.org/resources

Scholarly Kitchen (https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/)

The Worldwide Trends of Misconduct in Research

The Worldwide Trends of Misconduct in Research

The Wikipedia website, under the title “List of scientific misconduct incidents,” provides data for these fields, which include biology and biomedical sciences, chemistry, computer science and mathematics, geology, philosophy, physics and engineering, plant biology, psychiatry, and the social sciences. Could you imagine that the majority of these individuals are from the US, UK, and Japan? This is concerning for the scientific community, as these researchers’ papers frequently appear in various articles based on their master’s and Ph.D. degrees in philosophy, among other subjects. You can access the “List of Scientific Misconduct Incidents” link below for further information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_misconduct_incidents

The Retraction Watch database

We conducted a cross-sectional study using the Retraction Watch database, journal citation reports, and PubMed as data sources. We included biomedical original papers, reviews, case reports, and letters retracted between January 1, 2000, and June 30, 2021, with at least one author affiliated with a European institution. We analyzed the four countries that had the most retractions: Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain. 2069 publications were identified. Retraction rates increased from 10.7 to 44.8 per 100,000 publications between 2000 and 2020. Research misconduct accounted for most retractions (66.8%). The reasons for misconduct-related retractions shifted over time, ranging from problems with copyright and authorship in 2000 (2.5 per 100,000 publications) to duplication in 2020 (8.6 per 100,000 publications). In 2020, the main reasons were fabrication and falsification in the United Kingdom (6.2 per 100,000 publications) and duplication in Spain (13.2 per 100,000 publications). Retractions of papers by authors affiliated with European institutions are on the rise, primarily due to research misconduct. The type of misconduct has changed over time and differs between European countries.

The Retraction Watch database

A Bitter Reality: What Is Happening Now?

When the researcher’s results do not align with the existing literature and ground knowledge, they often manipulate the data matrix to achieve their desired outcomes. For the support of results published in biased journals, sometimes the researchers publish in fake journals and use those papers in discussion to support the results. The internal review board investigates the project and allocates funds appropriately. Most of the fund-takers are using papers from paper mills. The use of humanizing tools and other rephrasing techniques in published work poses another danger of plagiarism.

A Bitter Reality: What Is Happening Now?

What happened if the Research cheaters published manipulated/fake/ biased data?

These are the few points that impact the researcher, such as potential involvement in fraudulent activities, the creation of a fake paper, the use of his name as a coauthor, and more.

  • The damage of the reputation
  • Loss of funding and grants
  • Termination and suspension
  • Authors may face legal consequences
  • Negative Impact of student
  • Damage the field

Such a terrible condition in developing countries like Pakistan, Research cheaters

Similar to cartoon generals who may not have won any wars, but possess medals adorning their oversized chests, Pakistan now boasts legions of highly paid, ignorant cartoon professors. Pakistan now has legions of highly paid, ignoramus cartoon professors. Our professors are publishing a huge number of research papers these days, almost 10 times more than a decade ago. These appear in so-called international journals with high impact factors, are well-cited, and seem to meet all high quality requirements. The authors rake in cash prizes and national awards, and the Higher Education Commission (HEC) screams about the post-2002’revolution’ at every opportunity. (Prof Pervez Hoodbhoy)

Research cheaters: Supervisor choose close friend for PhD thesis evaluation

The same dynamics apply to PhD production. PhD candidates rarely, if at all, have their basic subject knowledge tested. Supervisors often choose the referees of a candidate’s thesis for their cooperation, despite their supposed impartiality. Of course, a supervisor can appropriately doctor the reports as needed.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1221057/enough-phds-thank-you

Research cheaters: Supervisor choose close friend for PhD thesis evaluation

I am grateful to you, my readers, and I hope this information provides you with new insight.

Dr. Abid Hussain Nawaz

Post Doc, Ph.D., MPhil

1 Comment

  1. Eman Fatima says:

    “Dear Dr.Abid,

    Your courageous article, “Research Cheaters: Dishonesty in Research,” has shed crucial light on a sensitive yet vital topic. Your meticulous examination of the issue and thoughtful analysis have sparked essential discussions and reflections within the research community.

    Your dedication to upholding the integrity and ethics of research is truly commendable. By addressing the complexities and consequences of research dishonesty, you have empowered readers to prioritize transparency, accountability, and truth in their work.

    Thank you for your bravery and commitment to advancing the highest standards in research. Your contribution has made a significant impact and will continue to inspire responsible and ethical research practices.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *