Do fake scientific researches exist?
Unfortunately,
fake or not rigorous enough researches exist. And the bigger problem
that ordinary people, mass media and even naive scientists trust
them. In a situation when anything may be published in journals not
only fake news is a headache, but also fake science. In the
contemporary world, we face tons of information, and only very few of
us have enough time to figure out what is right. Usually, we prefer
to believe the authorities in the area – scientists. But not all of
them are honest and serious in their jobs.
The group which is concerned about that more than others – scientists themselves. They care about the reputation of science and its purity. If some colleagues do fake researches, then the whole of science becomes a little fake. And people, who dedicated their lives to searching the truth cannot put up with that, cause then their job loses the sense.
An experiment with fake articles
To expose how significant is a danger for the area three researchers sent 20 fake articles to journals. And seven of them were allowed to publish after the check by peer-review committees. One of the published researches, for example, suggested that training man like dogs may help against rapes. Provokers suppose, that as society is highly concern about rapes, it is easy to push journals and mass media to publish researches on this and other hot topics without acute observation.
What is the danger
Of course, this experiment is questionable. Maybe it wasn't absolutely ethically to check the weakness of journals of such delicate themes. But still, it provokes the discussion. Some people suppose issues of that experiment may be spread on other topics also. In biology and medicine, it is not such a big problem cause there are more strict demands. But in psychology and sociology, some articles contradict each other, and some have no enough proves. Of course finally, scientific society claims their position on those themes. But who cares of that, if hundreds or even thousands people had already got controversial information and maybe changed their lives according to it?...
Also, it forms the other problem. If it is so easy to publish fake articles, real and reliable articles may be just lost in this flow of fake. And then real ways to improve the situation with violence, discrimination, and other social problems will be discarded. While the fake is used it increases the tense in society and diminish abilities to have a sane dialog.
Also, that's an alarm sign that some people consider authors of articles, but not journals themselves responsible for fake publications. It means that we cannot expect that journals guard us all over against possibly false information.
Which researches are reliable
Bad news: if even scientific journals cannot protect their readers from fake articles, then it's even harder to common people (including journalists) to recognize them. The good news is that there are still methods. First: how many researches there are with same or similar results. Is it only one? Well, then maybe it's better to wait until further investigations. What do competent scientists In this area who care about their reputation think of that? Nothing? Well, then maybe it doesn't cost attention. Unfortunately, the peers' reviews may also be bought, so not all of them are absolutely reliable.
Design of research. To understand how much the article may be trusted It is recommended to look at the evidence in the paper. Is the proof 20 interviews with people from the same social group? Well, it may be interesting to think of that. But also it's vital to understand that results cannot be spread absolutely to other groups. For example, an investigation showed that European American tend to have more frequently socially disengaging emotions, while the Japanese tend to have socially engaging. Besides the culture, people may be influenced by their finances, social and family status, level of education, location. So it is essential that the article describes accurately the portray of the researched group.
Also, that's important to know that journals retract papers that they published but later found unreliable. All this may be found through the search systems. Also, that is crucially important to teach children critical thinking.
An important word for likely proper research is “respected.” Respected author, institution, journal, and reviewers. But this is just an additional point, cause there may be journals and authors who are newcomers but did an excellent job. In such a case, more attention to the text itself is needed. Methods of the research should be described precisely and so that it may be repeated and checked by other people if required.
In medical researches, control groups are needed, and a placebo group is also recommended, cause placebo effect may have a dramatical influence on the result. It's better when not only participants but also performers of research are blinded. For example, if it is a research about drugs, they don't know, who take real medicine and who take a placebo. For reliable results – a large sample size. Results should be described clearly and in details.
If researchers describe the limitations of this study and allow some amount of self-criticism, that's a good sign. If they consider it's perfect and there are no doubts about it – this sign is alarming. Even scientists claim that limitations are not appropriately acknowledged in the scientific literature. So sometimes it is not as reliable as we used to think. If the conclusion claims some ideas which are not proved by data duly, these conclusions are not reliable.
That's normal if works of different authors contradict each other. And not normal if researcher ignores works, which show other results (if those searches are reliable also, cause fake or feeble ones unlikely need representation). An ethical side like informed consent is also meaningful. Professional ethics became a part of science. And even if research is absolutely reliable, but there was an ethics violation, it causes discontent amongst colleagues and ordinary people. And leads even to proposals to ignore recherches which violated ethics. By the way, some of the famous experiment well-known today obviously violated ethic principles (like a famous Stanford prison experiment in 1971). And although they had a significant influence, in a contemporary word such experiments are not possible. Or at least the public may not know about them, for it will cause resentment.
If a researcher is a passionate proponent of some idea and this idea is unconditionally proved in a paper, then it is suspicious. Although grammatical and other mistakes may not influence the result, they usually show that authors were inaccurate so they could make mistakes in their design or conclusions also.
If work contradicts many others which were made before it may look revolutionary, but that's also the reason to ask the question: “Why?” Is that possible that so many scientists before were wrong? Well, theoretically everything is possible, of course. But if there Is such a severe contradiction, it will be useful to wait until the scientific establishment reacts this new results. Contrary to the conspiracy theory many scientists are honest people, who wholeheartedly love the science and the truth. So later discussion will show if a new work worth attention. Also if an
The group which is concerned about that more than others – scientists themselves. They care about the reputation of science and its purity. If some colleagues do fake researches, then the whole of science becomes a little fake. And people, who dedicated their lives to searching the truth cannot put up with that, cause then their job loses the sense.
An experiment with fake articles
To expose how significant is a danger for the area three researchers sent 20 fake articles to journals. And seven of them were allowed to publish after the check by peer-review committees. One of the published researches, for example, suggested that training man like dogs may help against rapes. Provokers suppose, that as society is highly concern about rapes, it is easy to push journals and mass media to publish researches on this and other hot topics without acute observation.
What is the danger
Of course, this experiment is questionable. Maybe it wasn't absolutely ethically to check the weakness of journals of such delicate themes. But still, it provokes the discussion. Some people suppose issues of that experiment may be spread on other topics also. In biology and medicine, it is not such a big problem cause there are more strict demands. But in psychology and sociology, some articles contradict each other, and some have no enough proves. Of course finally, scientific society claims their position on those themes. But who cares of that, if hundreds or even thousands people had already got controversial information and maybe changed their lives according to it?...
Also, it forms the other problem. If it is so easy to publish fake articles, real and reliable articles may be just lost in this flow of fake. And then real ways to improve the situation with violence, discrimination, and other social problems will be discarded. While the fake is used it increases the tense in society and diminish abilities to have a sane dialog.
Also, that's an alarm sign that some people consider authors of articles, but not journals themselves responsible for fake publications. It means that we cannot expect that journals guard us all over against possibly false information.
Which researches are reliable
Bad news: if even scientific journals cannot protect their readers from fake articles, then it's even harder to common people (including journalists) to recognize them. The good news is that there are still methods. First: how many researches there are with same or similar results. Is it only one? Well, then maybe it's better to wait until further investigations. What do competent scientists In this area who care about their reputation think of that? Nothing? Well, then maybe it doesn't cost attention. Unfortunately, the peers' reviews may also be bought, so not all of them are absolutely reliable.
Design of research. To understand how much the article may be trusted It is recommended to look at the evidence in the paper. Is the proof 20 interviews with people from the same social group? Well, it may be interesting to think of that. But also it's vital to understand that results cannot be spread absolutely to other groups. For example, an investigation showed that European American tend to have more frequently socially disengaging emotions, while the Japanese tend to have socially engaging. Besides the culture, people may be influenced by their finances, social and family status, level of education, location. So it is essential that the article describes accurately the portray of the researched group.
Also, that's important to know that journals retract papers that they published but later found unreliable. All this may be found through the search systems. Also, that is crucially important to teach children critical thinking.
An important word for likely proper research is “respected.” Respected author, institution, journal, and reviewers. But this is just an additional point, cause there may be journals and authors who are newcomers but did an excellent job. In such a case, more attention to the text itself is needed. Methods of the research should be described precisely and so that it may be repeated and checked by other people if required.
In medical researches, control groups are needed, and a placebo group is also recommended, cause placebo effect may have a dramatical influence on the result. It's better when not only participants but also performers of research are blinded. For example, if it is a research about drugs, they don't know, who take real medicine and who take a placebo. For reliable results – a large sample size. Results should be described clearly and in details.
If researchers describe the limitations of this study and allow some amount of self-criticism, that's a good sign. If they consider it's perfect and there are no doubts about it – this sign is alarming. Even scientists claim that limitations are not appropriately acknowledged in the scientific literature. So sometimes it is not as reliable as we used to think. If the conclusion claims some ideas which are not proved by data duly, these conclusions are not reliable.
That's normal if works of different authors contradict each other. And not normal if researcher ignores works, which show other results (if those searches are reliable also, cause fake or feeble ones unlikely need representation). An ethical side like informed consent is also meaningful. Professional ethics became a part of science. And even if research is absolutely reliable, but there was an ethics violation, it causes discontent amongst colleagues and ordinary people. And leads even to proposals to ignore recherches which violated ethics. By the way, some of the famous experiment well-known today obviously violated ethic principles (like a famous Stanford prison experiment in 1971). And although they had a significant influence, in a contemporary word such experiments are not possible. Or at least the public may not know about them, for it will cause resentment.
If a researcher is a passionate proponent of some idea and this idea is unconditionally proved in a paper, then it is suspicious. Although grammatical and other mistakes may not influence the result, they usually show that authors were inaccurate so they could make mistakes in their design or conclusions also.
If work contradicts many others which were made before it may look revolutionary, but that's also the reason to ask the question: “Why?” Is that possible that so many scientists before were wrong? Well, theoretically everything is possible, of course. But if there Is such a severe contradiction, it will be useful to wait until the scientific establishment reacts this new results. Contrary to the conspiracy theory many scientists are honest people, who wholeheartedly love the science and the truth. So later discussion will show if a new work worth attention. Also if an
Sources:
Comments
Post a Comment