Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 23, 2026

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research
Published on: August 4, 2023
Estimating the prevalence of researcher misconduct: a study of UK academics within biological sciences
David L Roberts1, Freya A V St John1
1Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent , Canterbury, Kent , UK.
Abstract:
Misconduct in academic research is undoubtedly increasing, but studies estimating the prevalence of such behaviour suffer from biases inherent in researching sensitive topics. We compared the unmatched-count technique (UCT) and the crosswise-model (CM), two methods specifically designed to increase honest reporting to sensitive questions, with direct questioning (DQ) for five types of misconduct in the biological sciences. UCT performed better than CM and either outperformed or produced similar estimates to DQ depending on the question. Estimates of academic misconduct increased with decreasing seriousness of the behaviour, from c. 0% for data fabrication to >68% for inappropriate co-authorship. Results show that research into even minor issues of misconduct, is sensitive, suggesting that future studies should consider using specialised questioning techniques as they are more likely to yield accurate figures.
Related Concept Videos
Ethics in Research
Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
Synthetic Biology
Golden rice
Golden rice is a genetically modified...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Threats to Biodiversity
In-vitro Mutagenesis

