Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications

View ORCID ProfileElisabeth M. Bik, View ORCID ProfileArturo Casadevall, View ORCID ProfileFerric C. Fang
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/049452
Elisabeth M. Bik
1Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Elisabeth M. Bik
  • For correspondence: eliesbik@stanford.edu
Arturo Casadevall
2Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
3Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Arturo Casadevall
Ferric C. Fang
4Departments of Laboratory Medicine and Microbiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ferric C. Fang
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Inaccurate data in scientific papers can result from honest error or intentional falsification. This study attempted to determine the percentage of published papers containing inappropriate image duplication, a specific type of inaccurate data. The images from a total of 20,621 papers in 40 scientific journals from 1995-2014 were visually screened. Overall, 3.8% of published papers contained problematic figures, with at least half exhibiting features suggestive of deliberate manipulation. The prevalence of papers with problematic images rose markedly during the past decade. Additional papers written by authors of papers with problematic images had an increased likelihood of containing problematic images as well. As this analysis focused only on one type of data, it is likely that the actual prevalence of inaccurate data in the published literature is higher. The marked variation in the frequency of problematic images among journals suggest that journal practices, such as pre-publication image screening, influence the quality of the scientific literature.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted May 17, 2016.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
Elisabeth M. Bik, Arturo Casadevall, Ferric C. Fang
bioRxiv 049452; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/049452
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
The Prevalence of Inappropriate Image Duplication in Biomedical Research Publications
Elisabeth M. Bik, Arturo Casadevall, Ferric C. Fang
bioRxiv 049452; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/049452

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Scientific Communication and Education
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4237)
  • Biochemistry (9155)
  • Bioengineering (6797)
  • Bioinformatics (24052)
  • Biophysics (12149)
  • Cancer Biology (9562)
  • Cell Biology (13814)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7653)
  • Ecology (11729)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15534)
  • Genetics (10663)
  • Genomics (14346)
  • Immunology (9502)
  • Microbiology (22876)
  • Molecular Biology (9113)
  • Neuroscience (49080)
  • Paleontology (357)
  • Pathology (1487)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2576)
  • Physiology (3851)
  • Plant Biology (8347)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1473)
  • Synthetic Biology (2299)
  • Systems Biology (6202)
  • Zoology (1302)