by Jim Rose in personnel economics

Daniele Fanellis’ study claimed to be the first meta-analysis of surveys asking scientists about their experiences of misconduct. It found that, on average:

About 2% of scientists admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once and

Up to one third admitted a variety of other questionable research practices including “dropping data points based on a gut feeling”, and “changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressures from a funding source”.

In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, fabrication, falsification and modification had been observed, on average, by over 14% of respondents, and other questionable practices by up to 72%.

Bruno Frey found that at U.S. Universities:

17% of post-doctoral fellows said they would select or omit data to improve results; and

81% would select, omit or fabricate data to win research grants!

As one American elite sportsmen said, if you are not cheating, you are not trying hard enough.