Falsification and fabrication of results

INTRODUCTION

In the world of scientific publications, moral principles are not quite different from
those in everyday life. There are cases of clear abuse in research. If abused, it creates unrest,
not only for the scientific community and its institutions, but for all individuals involved in
the process.

Publishing professional-scientific papers is not an easy task. As an author, you are

often confronted with strict reviewers, strict rules for publishing the newsroom, and extensive
authorial statements. On the other hand, you can meet authors who have submitted papers of
low scientific quality, plagiarism papers, papers that have already been published elsewhere
and so on. If ethics in science is to be followed, one must remain immune to all these
negative influences in the publishing process.

The aim of a paper is to make a guide to ethical principles available to all our readers
and contributors.

Academic publishing depends on and is based largely on trust. Editors should trust
reviewers that they will provide fair evaluation. Authors should have confidence that editors
will select appropriate reviewers and that readers will believe in the review process.
Academic publishing also arises in the midst of powerful intellectual, financial, and
sometimes political interests that may clash or compete. Good decisions and strong editorial
policies designed to manage these interests will foster a sustainable and efficient publishing
system that will benefit academic associations, journal editors, authors, research financiers,
readers and publishers. Good publishing practices are not developed by chance, and will only
become valuable if actively promoted (Graf et al., 2007).

Publication of a research paper is the last stage of a scientific project. It is the

culmination of several months and sometimes years of precise planning, implementation and
analysis of hundreds of experiments. In many cases, the funds to support the project came
from state money. Therefore, the expectations are that the work is done and performed
honestly, objectively and fairly. However, sometimes deviations from this ideal are possible.
Ethical breaches may be intentional, such as data breaches, or may arise out of ignorance
alone. However, in legal terminology, ignorance is not and cannot be an excuse. Thus, it is
the duty of every researcher to be aware of all the ethical requirements for conducting
scientific studies. In addition, the scientist should develop a strong sense of ethical
responsibility that should be applied at every stage of scientific research. Deviation from the
ethical course during the research is undoubtedly manifested during the publication phase
(Benos et. al., 2005).

Ethics of study design

Good research should be justified, well planned and properly designed so that it can
properly deal with any research issues that arise from it. Statistical questions, including
power calculations, should be considered at the beginning of the design. The research should
be conducted with high standards for quality control and data analysis. Data and records must
be kept for re-examination at someone's request. Fabricating results, falsifying, concealing or
misrepresenting data is scientifically misconduct. Documented review and formal approval
by a constituent review board (institutional review board or committee) are required for all
studies involving humans, medical records, and human tissues. Informed consent should
always be sought from participants in the publication process. If this is not possible, the
institutional review board must decide whether it is ethically acceptable (Callaham и
Waeckerle, 2001).

Authorship

There is no universal definition of authorship. Authorship implies a significant

intellectual contribution to the work and a certain role in the writing of the manuscript. Being
the author of a scientific paper is a privilege and one of the greatest satisfying experiences of
a scientist. To avoid disputes and misunderstandings that may lead to the delay or prevention
of publication, participants should determine at the beginning of the research and the writing
process who will be the author, who will be the co-author and in what order the authors will
be distributed. For all manuscripts, the respective authors should provide information on
certain contributions that the authors have made to the paper. The purpose of the list is to
clearly identify who is responsible for the quality, accuracy and ethics of the work and who
will respond if certain questions arise. This description of the authors should be an integral
part of any printed paper. The authors are responsible for creating all the components of the
manuscript. All authors must take responsibility, in writing, for the accuracy of the
manuscript and one author must be the guarantor and take responsibility for the work as a
whole.
 Basic principles of ethics in scientific research work

The progress of science and the development of society as a whole depends directly or
indirectly on the results of scientific research. The results are directly related to the basic
principles of good scientific practice and ethics in scientific and research activity.

Truth: if we take that knowledge is the property of all mankind and at the same time
significantly contributes to the general well-being and ensures progress, then it is clear that
the basic goal of science is truth.

Responsibility: The scientist is fully responsible for any scientific research or

experiment he carries out, especially with regard to its direct consequences on human life,
human physical and mental health, well-being, dignity and freedom.

Integrity: The scientist performs every act in scientific research in accordance with
all the requirements of the scientific method, within which he works, according to the highest
standards; The scientist analyzes the data, experiments, theories, his own or someone else's,
equally, in the required scope and precision; The scientist presents his data in full, accurately,
honestly and correctly.

Freedom: The scientist serves the purposes of scientific research, based on the
principles of freedom of research, as one of the most important expressions of democratic
order.

Collaboration: The scientist acts within the universal framework of scientific

cooperation, which is based on common scientific goals; The scientist fosters scientific
cooperation with and through openness, mutual assistance and trust between scientists,
assistants and students.

Professionalism: The scientist devotes himself to scientific research in a completely

professional way, rationally, using his own knowledge from his field of expertise.
 Academic dishonesty or inappropriate (non-academic) behavior

Academic dishonesty or inappropriate (non-academic) behavior is any form of

cheating or unprofessional behavior that occurs in connection with an official academic work,
research, etc. These include:

Plagiarism: using the ideas and results of others without their knowledge or being
involved in the work.

Falsification: falsifying data, information or citations in any formal academic

exercise.

Fraud: submitting false information about an official academic work.

Sabotage: preventing the performance of work (such as intentionally disrupting or

destroying an experiment).

Unprofessionall behavior: bias in evaluating the paper, procrastination in writing a

review with the intention not to publish the scientific paper, signing a review written by the
author himself, non-objective evaluation, categorization of scientific papers in higher
categories than deserved, etc.

Falsification and fabrication of results

Falsification means fabrication of data and results of research, alteration and misuse
of data and results, manipulation of data - concealment or omission of data that does not suit
the researcher or which can not be confirmed.

Fabrication is the falsification of data, information or citations in any formal academic

exercise. This involves inventing quotes to support the arguments. Fabrication dominates the
natural sciences, where students sometimes falsify data to make experiments "work." This
includes data falsification, which involves making false claims about research, including
selectively submitting results to rule out unfavorable data and to generate artificial data.
 Bibliographic citations are often fabricated, especially when a certain minimum
number of citations is required or considered sufficient for a particular type of paper. This
type of fabrication can range from listing works whose titles seem relevant but which the
student has not read, to inventing fake titles and authors.

There is also a dry-laboratory practice that can be performed in chemistry or other

laboratory courses, in which the teacher clearly expects the experiment to yield certain results
(confirming established laws), so that the student starts from the results and works
backwards, calculating what the experimental data should be, often adding variation to the
data. In some cases, the laboratory report is written before the experiment is performed, and
in some cases, the experiment is not performed at all. Either way, the results are what the
instructor expects.

Fabrication is defined as the recording or representation (in any format) of fictitious

data. Counterfeiting is the manipulation of data or experimental procedures to produce the
desired result or to avoid a complicated or unexplained result (Benos et al., 2005).

The initial fact-finding usually involves asking all parties involved to present their
case and explain the circumstances in writing. If the abuse occurred in the methodology or
technical issues section, experts who do not know the identity of the authors may be
consulted, or in some cases an external expert is required. Well, then come the conclusions
about whether there is enough evidence of misconduct. The purpose is not to determine
whether actual abuse has occurred but to determine the exact details of that misconduct.

To ensure the good quality of a scientific paper, appropriate systems for detecting
falsified data, such as manipulated images or plagiarized text (for routine use or when in
doubt) should be available. There are special software programs that can detect if one abstract
of a paper matches another and in what percentage it matches.
 CONCLUSION

There are many cases of research abuse. In our environment, very little attention is
paid to the ethics of publishing. We often witness plagiarism, pressure to publish a certain
work by a certain author who needs a title selection, inconsistencies in peer review,
sponsorship of editorial policy, etc. The gatekeepers of the publication must fight to minimize
the likelihood of several individuals committing ethical violations on the surface and
threatening the integrity of the rest of the scientific community. Ethical violations are the
result of confusion or lack of knowledge about this issue and therefore the responsibility
should be taken to educate the scientific community on ethical issues in the publication
process.

By increasing education and awareness of ethical issues relevant to scientific research

and publication, certain irregularities will be reduced. In the future, authors should expect
their papers to meet a range of ethical standards.

References

Benos, D.,J., Fabres, J., Farmer, J., Gutierrez, J.,P., Hennessy, K., Kosek, D., Lee, J.,
H., Olteanu, D., Russell, T., Shaikh, F., and Wang K., 2005. Ethics and scientific publication,
2004

Callaham, M.,L., Waeckerle, J.,F., 2001. Deciphering the authorship code.

Callaham, M.,L., 2003. Journal Policy on Ethics in Scientific

Graf, C , Wager, E., Bowman, A., Fiack, S., Scott-Lichter, D., Robinson, A, 2007.
Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics

Benos, D.J., Fabres, J., Farmer, J., Gutierrez, J.P., Hennessy, K., Kosek, D., Lee, J.H.,
Olteanu, D., Russell, T., Shaikh, F., and Wang, K., 2005. Ethics and scientific publication.
 JSER online, 2011. Authorship statement form. Available from URL: http://jser.fzf.
ukim.edu.mk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id= 52&Itemid=57

Laflin, M.,T., Glover, E.,D., Robert J. McDermott, R.,J., 2005. Publication Ethics: An
Examination of Authorship Practices.

Владимир Т., Етика на објавување на стручно-научни трудови, Годишен

зборник, Филозофски факултет

Никола В. Димитров, Елизабета Митрева, Мимоза Серафимова,

МЕТОДОЛОГИЈА НА НАУЧНО ИСТРАЖУВАЧКА РАБОТА, (наука и практика),
2017

Миљевиќ, М. И., Методологија научног рада. Филозофски факултет-

Универзитет у Источном Сарајеву, Пале, 2007