PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 10, 2025Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118 citationsOpen Access

The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale are large, resilient, and growing rapidly

View Full Paper
RRReese RichardsonNorthwestern UniversitySHSpencer S. HongNorthwestern UniversityJBJennifer A. ByrneThe University of Sydney

Key Points

  • Coordinated activities among individuals have led to the publication of retracted papers across various journals.
  • Brokers facilitate large-scale publication of fraudulent research in targeted journals, raising concerns for scientific integrity.
  • Not all scientific subfields are equally affected by fraud, indicating a selective targeting of disciplines or journals.
  • The ability of fraud-enabling entities to evade interventions results in fraudulent publications outpacing legitimate research.

Abstract

Science is characterized by collaboration and cooperation, but also by uncertainty, competition, and inequality. While there has always been some concern that these pressures may compel some to defect from the scientific research ethos—i.e., fail to make genuine contributions to the production of knowledge or to the training of an expert workforce—the focus has largely been on the actions of lone individuals. Recently, however, reports of coordinated scientific fraud activities have increased. Some suggest that the ease of communication provided by the internet and open-access publishing have created the conditions for the emergence of entities—paper mills (i.e., sellers of mass-produced low quality and fabricated research), brokers (i.e., conduits between producers and publishers of fraudulent research), predatory journals, who do not conduct any quality controls on submissions—that facilitate systematic scientific fraud. Here, we demonstrate through case studies that i) individuals have cooperated to publish papers that were eventually retracted in a number of journals, ii) brokers have enabled publication in targeted journals at scale, and iii), within a field of science, not all subfields are equally targeted for scientific fraud. Our results reveal some of the strategies that enable the entities promoting scientific fraud to evade interventions. Our final analysis suggests that this ability to evade interventions is enabling the number of fraudulent publications to grow at a rate far outpacing that of legitimate science.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Richardson et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68c19f7f54b1d3bfb60daa66https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2420092122
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science2021 · 271 citations
  2. 2Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments2000 · 4,417 citations
  3. 3Conflicting interests: when whistleblowers profit from allegations of scientific misconduct2022 · 3 citations
  4. 4Prediction of robust scientific facts from literature2022 · 30 citations
  5. 5Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing1995 · 111,687 citations