title: What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of: "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"?
abstract: Peer review is an essential component of the process that is universally applied prior to the acceptance of a manuscript, grant or other scholarly work. Most of us willingly accept the responsibilities that come with being a reviewer but how comfortable are we with the process? Peer review is open to abuse but how should it be policed and can it be improved? A bad peer review process can inadvertently ruin an individual's career, but are there penalties for policing a reviewer who deliberately sabotages a manuscript or grant? Science has received an increasingly tainted name because of recent high profile cases of alleged scientific misconduct. Once considered the results of work stress or a temporary mental health problem, scientific misconduct is increasingly being reported and proved to be a repeat offence. How should scientific misconduct be handled--is it a criminal offence and subject to national or international law? Similarly plagiarism is an ever-increasing concern whether at the level of the student or a university president. Are the existing laws tough enough? These issues, with appropriate examples, are dealt with in this review.
authors.affiliation: School of Medical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. chris.triggle@rmit.edu.au
authors.forename: Chris R
authors.initials: CR
authors.lastname: Triggle
authors.forename: David J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Triggle
mesh_terms: D016265:Conflict of Interest / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006801:Humans; D010380:Peer Review / Q000639:trends*; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D015714:Plagiarism; D015871:Scientific Misconduct