SCIENTIFIC FRAUD Part I: Definition, General Concepts, Historical Cases

Abstract

Scientific fraud still lacks a precise, universally accepted definition: the borders between unambiguously established fraud, errors, misconduct are uncertain: this frequently complicates decisions on whether or not cases of questionable behaviour can be classified as true fraud. In this article we have listed the behaviours which establish that true fraud has occurred. The most important is undoubtedly the intentionality of the behaviour, aimed at creating fictitious support of a theory or of a hypothesis. The fraudulent behaviour must have violated the standards of the time in which it occurred: this is an important point, as these standards may have been different in different times. Also important is the fact that the assessment of the seriousness of suspected cases is incremental: it goes from simple misconduct cases that would border on negligence, to cases of evident fraud, e.g. the fabrication or falsification of data or results, and/or the appropriation (plagiarism) of another person’s ideas or data without giving appropriate credit. In recent times, scientific fraud has become widespread, but it was known in the distant past as well: it has involved scientists who are real icons in the history of science. This article analyses the most important cases, dissecting with great attention the particular aspects of the accusations that had been levelled at them. With one exception, it clears them all of the accusations.