Classification of paper fabrication
In these cases, the text of other publication is copied, and just some of the keywords are changed into their own unique ones. It might be thought that the researchers from non-English-speaking nations tend to do this because of the language barrier. The copyright infringement is a great concern, but from the scientific point of view, the actual research content is unique, that there won’t be any major issues on science.
The reuse of images, which was also an issue in the above case, refers to using, for instance, the image of a cell referred to as “cell A” in one paper, and then using the same image again in another paper, referring to it as “cell B”, which is different from “cell A”. This is a clear form of fabrication, and so either resubmitting factually correct images, or withdrawing the paper, is necessary. These manipulations might occur when the authors cannot meet the peer review requests to show more clear images with the original images. As long as the authors replace images simply because they unfortunately do not have clear ones, it should be possible to obtain the same results by replicating experiments. However, if the images are taken from different experiments to fabricate the scientific fact as they aim to be, it is obvious that the reproductive experiments fail. Such cases present a huge concern not only they lose their confidence but they affect the progress of science itself. For example, if researchers and students consider plans for their next experiment based on such problematic research, they may find themselves puzzled by not being able to replicate the results even after several months, only to reach a conclusion that their results impossible to replicate. Even worse, they might fall into lying over the previous fabrications.
Image-manipulation was also the method of fabrication in the controversial paper. It seems to have frequently occurred in images used to show the results of electrophoresis. It includes covering base images with other images, matching up electrophoresis images from completely different experiments, and other such falsifying actions. The background of these actions would be the same as seen in cases of the image reuses.
4)Figure and table data
There could also be some cases in which data found in figures and tables are altered. Typical scientific discussion is based on whether a certain value is higher or lower than the control, but if these values are manipulated, researchers can essentially make up any story they wish. Statistics can also be altered in such ways.
If such alterations are simply made as an attempt to make figures and tables look nicer, and attempts to replicate the results of any experiments attain similar results, then there might not be any actual damage on science, but if such alterations are made in an attempt to match previously created stories, it is unlikely such experiment results can be replicated. Such fabrications will negatively impact researchers who use those results for planning their own studies. This is not simply a waste of time, but a waste of research resources, which in turn consumes valuable research funds.
If you simply want to discount the value of research papers by stating that such issues are inevitable, there is nothing left to say, but as Science Postprint, a supplier of academic research papers, we aim to improve the reliability of such academic works and ensure the papers that we publish are highly valuable. Thus, we would like to express our desire to work hard to nip such research paper fabrication in the bud.