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

24.0K
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.
24.0K
The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

62.1K
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.
62.1K
Social Traps01:41

Social Traps

23.5K
Social traps are negative situations where people get caught in a direction or relationship that later proves to be unpleasant, with no easy way to back out of or avoid. The concept was orignally introduced by John Platt who applied psychology to Garrett Hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons", where in New England herd owners could let their cattle graze in the common ground. This situation seems like a good idea, but an individual could have an advantage. If they owned...
23.5K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

2.4K
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...
2.4K
The DNA Replication Fork01:02

The DNA Replication Fork

36.9K
An organism’s genome needs to be duplicated in an efficient and error-free manner for its growth and survival. The replication fork is a Y-shaped active region where two strands of DNA are separated and replicated continuously. The coupling of DNA unzipping and complementary strand synthesis is a characteristic feature of a replication fork.   Organisms with small circular DNA, such as E. coli, often have a single origin of replication; therefore, they have only two replication...
36.9K
Obedience01:08

Obedience

33.1K
According to obedience research, we may harm others under the forceful pressures of an authority figure (Milgram, 1974). How about if the inappropriate orders were delivered with less force? The increasing interdependence between nurses and physicians compelled Hofling and his colleagues to explore nurses’ reactions to a potentially harmful medical request made by the perceived authority figure, the doctor (Hofling, Brotzman, Dalrymple, Graves, & Pierce, 1966). In this situation,...
33.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Understanding the qPCR Standard Curve: From Assay Validation to Absolute Quantification and Variance PCR.

International journal of molecular sciences·2026
Same author

Quantification Revisited: What qPCR Efficiency Models Reveal About Data Analysis Integrity.

International journal of molecular sciences·2026
Same author

Real-Time Reverse Transcription Quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) Methodological Standards and Reporting Practices.

Clinical chemistry·2026
Same author

MISEV and MIQE: integrating domain-specific and general standards to strengthen extracellular vesicle biomarker research.

Extracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids·2026
Same author

When Two-Fold Is Not Enough: Quantifying Uncertainty in Low-Copy qPCR.

International journal of molecular sciences·2025
Same author

Discovery, phylogenetic, and comparative genomic analysis of novel avian gammacoronaviruses identified in feral pigeons (<i>Columba livia domestica</i>).

Journal of virology·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 16, 2025

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

4.6K

Fragile methods, fractured trust: rethinking scientific responsibility.

Stephen A Bustin1, Carl T Wittwer2

  • 1Medical Technology Research Centre, Faculty of Health, Education, Medicine and Social Care, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford CM1 1SQ, UK.

Methods (San Diego, Calif.)
|July 9, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Science faces a credibility crisis due to internal flawed methods and poor communication. Addressing bad practices in molecular biology and diagnostics, like quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) misuse, is crucial for restoring public trust.

Keywords:
Gene expressionMIQEMolecular diagnosticsReproducibilityScientific integrityqPCR

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Accuracy and Reproducibility in Whole Bone Bending Tests
04:20

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Accuracy and Reproducibility in Whole Bone Bending Tests

Published on: September 1, 2023

969
Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations
09:07

Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations

Published on: September 16, 2015

9.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 16, 2025

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

4.6K
Author Spotlight: Enhancing Accuracy and Reproducibility in Whole Bone Bending Tests
04:20

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Accuracy and Reproducibility in Whole Bone Bending Tests

Published on: September 1, 2023

969
Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations
09:07

Experimental Research Examining How People Can Cope with Uncertainty Through Soft Haptic Sensations

Published on: September 16, 2015

9.1K

Area of Science:

  • Molecular biology
  • Applied sciences
  • Diagnostics

Background:

  • Science faces a significant credibility problem, originating from within the scientific community itself.
  • Flawed methodologies, selective reporting, and communication prioritizing image over clarity have normalized poor practices.
  • This issue is prevalent in molecular biology, diagnostics, and related applied sciences.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To examine how internal scientific practices undermine credibility.
  • To highlight the misuse of technologies like quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) as a case study.
  • To underscore the impact of misreported and exaggerated findings on public trust and health.

Main Methods:

  • Review of scientific practices and communication strategies.
  • Analysis of case studies, including the misuse of quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR).
  • Examination of the consequences of distorted scientific findings on public health and policy.

Main Results:

  • Bad practices, including methodological flaws and selective reporting, are normalized in key scientific fields.
  • Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), a mature technology, is routinely misused.
  • Misreported or exaggerated scientific findings have led to public confusion, eroded trust, and endangered public health, impacting decisions from vaccine hesitancy to policy.

Conclusions:

  • Restoring scientific credibility requires transparent practices and ethical responsibility in both research conduct and communication.
  • Scientists must recognize that communication is not value-neutral and has significant public consequences.
  • Public skepticism is justified until science addresses its internal credibility issues and improves communication transparency.