What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of: " All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing?"

Chris R. Triggle, David J. Triggle

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Peer review is an essential component of the process that is universally applied prior to the aceptance of a manuscript, grant or other scholarly work. Most of us willingly accept the responsibilities that come with being a reviewer but how comfortable are we with the process? Peer review is open to abuse but how should it be policed and can it be improved? A bad peer review process can inadvertently ruin an individual's career, but are there penalties for policing a reviewer who deliberately sabotages a manuscript or grant? Science has received an increasingly tainted name because of recent high profile cases of alleged scientific misconduct. Once considered the results of work stress or a temporary mental health problem, scientific misconduct is increasingly being reported and proved to be a repeat offence. How should scientific misconduct be handled - is it a criminal offence and subject to national or international law? Similarly plagiarism is an ever-increasing concern whether at the level of the student or a university president. Are the existing laws tough enough? These issues, with appropriate examples, are dealt with in this review.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)39-53
Number of pages15
JournalVascular health and risk management
Volume3
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 11 Jun 2007

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Conflicts of interest
  • Journal impact factors
  • Peer review
  • Plagiarism
  • Scientific misconduct

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Hematology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this