In a ‘publish or perish’ culture, some scientists may resort to questionable research practices or even fraud. Scientific paper mills and artificial intelligence increasingly threaten the pursuit of truth in science. Structural changes, including heightened scrutiny of papers and authorship and better funding, are needed to ensure scientific integrity.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Bik, E. M., Casadevall, A. & Fang, F. C. The prevalence of inappropriate image duplication in biomedical research publications. mBio 7, https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.00809-16 (2016).
Van Noorden, R. How big is science’s fake-paper problem? Nature 623, 466–467 (2023).
Byrne, J. A. et al. Protection of the human gene research literature from contract cheating organizations known as research paper mills. Nucleic Acids Res. 50, 12058–12070 (2022).
Sanderson, K. Science’s fake-paper problem: high-profile effort will tackle paper mills. Nature 626, 17–18 (2024).
Banks, M. How fishy email addresses tipped off a sleuth to a paper mill. Retraction Watch https://go.nature.com/44jQcqt (6 February 2023).
Else, H. What makes an undercover science sleuth tick? Fake-paper detective speaks out. Nature https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02099-8 (4 August 2022).
Larousserie, D., G. Cabanac, le Sisyphe de la dépollution de la science. Le Monde https://go.nature.com/3UEjM6C (22 April 2024).
Oza, A. AI beats human sleuth at finding problematic images in research papers. Nature https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02920-y (3 October 2023).
Oransky, I. How to find evidence of paper mills using peer review comments. Retraction Watch https://go.nature.com/3we9X6e (21 February 2022).
Kincaid, E. Meet a sleuth whose work has resulted in more than 850 retractions. Retraction Watch https://go.nature.com/4bhPKLD (25 October 2022).
Montanari, S. Retraction, She Wrote: Dorothy Bishop’s life after research. The Transmitter https://go.nature.com/3UpkJ1k (12 June 2023).
Piper, K. Is it defamation to point out scientific research fraud? Vox https://go.nature.com/4biP09a (9 August 2023).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
E.M.B. is an independent consultant who has received payments from scientific publishers and institutions to investigate particular cases of research misconduct, or for giving talks and workshops about research integrity and misconduct. In addition, she receives donations to support her work through Patreon.com.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bik, E.M. Finding the truth in science. Nat Rev Cancer (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-024-00702-w
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-024-00702-w
