Science was based on mutual trust a few decades years ago but with the development into a large money making and career system we cannot believe any more in published results. This affects basically all disciplines not only those that notoriously known for bad quality.<\/p>\n
It affects now even thousands of papers that report wrong\u00a0 microscope manufactures as possible sign of misconduct as reported now by Retractionwatch<\/a>.<\/p>\n One in four papers on research involving scanning electron microscopy (SEM) misidentifies the specific instrument that was used, raising suspicions of misconduct, according to a new study.\u00a0 The work,\u00a0published<\/a>\u00a0August 27 as\u00a0a preprint<\/a>\u00a0on the Open Science Framework , examined SEM images in more than 1 million studies published by 50 materials science and engineering journals since 2010.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n So I see only one possibility: Mutual trust needs to be replaced with more vigorous control of the the research community and not just two dozen sleuths and journalists. Research integrity should become an own recognized scientific discipline with full-term departments, funding, teaching and established methods & software tools. <\/p>\n\n <\/p>\n Science was based on mutual trust a few decades years ago but with the development into a large money making and career system we cannot believe any more in published results. This affects basically all disciplines not only those that notoriously known for bad quality. It affects now even thousands of papers that report wrong\u00a0 … Continue reading Science was based on mutual trust in the past<\/span>