Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Ethics in Research01:56

Ethics in Research

26.2K
Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
26.2K
Bias01:22

Bias

8.0K
Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
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...
8.0K
Scientific Nature of Social Psychology01:30

Scientific Nature of Social Psychology

758
Social psychology is a scientific discipline dedicated to understanding how individuals think, feel, and behave in social contexts. Unlike common sense, which relies on anecdotal experiences and intuition, social psychology employs systematic research and empirical methods to ensure objectivity and reliability. This distinction is fundamental in distinguishing scientifically supported findings from mere speculation.Four fundamental scientific values guide a structured approach to research in...
758
The Scientific Method01:32

The Scientific Method

275.3K
The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
275.3K
The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

67.2K
Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
67.2K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.4K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
11.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Psychotherapies for Panic Disorder: A Tale of Two Sites.

The Journal of clinical psychiatry·2016
Same author

Adult separation anxiety in treatment nonresponders with anxiety disorders: delineation of the syndrome and exploration of attachment-based psychotherapy and biomarkers.

Comprehensive psychiatry·2016
Same author

Some revolutions in neuroscience.

Journal of cognitive neuroscience·2012
Same author

Alfred Russell Wallace and the evolution of the human mind.

The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry·2010
Same author

Suicide tourism in Manhattan, New York City, 1990-2004.

Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine·2007
Same author

Cocaine- and opiate-related fatal overdose in New York City, 1990-2000.

BMC public health·2007
Same journal

Implicit Bias: Evolution of a Powerful Idea.

Annual review of psychology·2026
Same journal

Introduction.

Annual review of psychology·2026
Same journal

Social Robotics Is Not (Just) About Machines, It Is About People: Psychology's Role in Developing Social Machines.

Annual review of psychology·2025
Same journal

Intensive Longitudinal Methods: Toward a Psychological Science of Daily Life.

Annual review of psychology·2025
Same journal

Human Rationality.

Annual review of psychology·2025
Same journal

Space to Act, Think, and Create.

Annual review of psychology·2025
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 5, 2026

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion
08:29

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion

Published on: March 31, 2022

5.0K

Scientific Misconduct.

Charles Gross1

  • 1Department of Psychology and Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544;

Annual Review of Psychology
|August 15, 2015
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Scientific misconduct, including fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, is a persistent issue. Studies indicate over 10% of scientists have witnessed research misconduct, prompting a review of ethics and prevention strategies.

Keywords:
fabricationfalsificationplagiarismscientific misconduct

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research
04:50

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.7K
Cell Culture Techniques and Practices to Avoid Contamination by Fungi and Bacteria in the Research Cell Culture Laboratory
13:39

Cell Culture Techniques and Practices to Avoid Contamination by Fungi and Bacteria in the Research Cell Culture Laboratory

Published on: July 7, 2023

19.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 5, 2026

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion
08:29

An Open Source Technology Platform to Manufacture Hydrogel-Based 3D Culture Models in an Automated and Standardized Fashion

Published on: March 31, 2022

5.0K
Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research
04:50

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.7K
Cell Culture Techniques and Practices to Avoid Contamination by Fungi and Bacteria in the Research Cell Culture Laboratory
13:39

Cell Culture Techniques and Practices to Avoid Contamination by Fungi and Bacteria in the Research Cell Culture Laboratory

Published on: July 7, 2023

19.6K

Area of Science:

  • Research Ethics
  • Scientific Integrity

Background:

  • Scientific misconduct, defined as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, has a long history.
  • Systematic governmental interest in the US began in the 1980s.
  • Previous studies show at least 10% of scientists have observed misconduct.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review the incidence of scientific misconduct.
  • To examine the rise in paper retractions.
  • To discuss the role of social media in scientific ethics and methods for reducing misconduct.

Main Methods:

  • Review of existing literature on scientific misconduct.
  • Analysis of studies on the frequency of observed misconduct.
  • Examination of trends in paper retractions and ethical considerations.

Main Results:

  • Most studies report that at least 10% of sampled scientists have observed scientific misconduct.
  • An increase in paper retractions has been noted.
  • Social media's influence on scientific ethics is a growing concern.

Conclusions:

  • Scientific misconduct remains a significant challenge.
  • Further investigation into ethical practices and misconduct reduction is warranted.
  • Addressing research integrity requires ongoing attention to evolving issues like social media's impact.