American Physical Society
American Physical Society Sites|APS|Journals|PhysicsCentral|Physics
 
Login| Become a Member|Contact Us
  • Publications
    • Journals of the American Physical Society
    • APS News
    • Physics
    • Physics Today
    • Capitol Hill Quarterly
    • Other APS Publications
    • Reciprocal Society Newsletters
  • Meetings & Events
    • March Meeting
    • April Meeting
    • Meeting Calendar
    • Abstract Submission
    • Archives of the Bulletin of the American Physical Society
    • Policies & Guidelines
    • Meeting Presentations
    • Virtual Press Rooms
  • Programs
    • Education
    • International Affairs
    • Physics Outreach
    • Women in Physics
    • Minorities in Physics
    • Prizes, Awards & Fellows
  • Membership
    • Join APS
    • Renew Membership
    • Member Directory
    • My Member Profile
    • Member Services
    • APS Units
  • Policy & Advocacy
    • Issues
    • Reports & Studies
    • APS Statements
    • Advocacy Tools
    • Advocacy Resources
    • Fellowships & Fellows
    • Contact APS Public Affairs
  • Careers In Physics
    • Physics Jobs
    • Becoming a Physicist
    • Career Guidance
    • Physics Careers Statistical Data
  • About APS
    • Mission Statement
    • Society Governance
    • Society History
    • Donate to APS
    • APS Jobs
    • Contact Us
Programs
  • Education
    • Why Study Physics?
    • K - 8
    • High School
    • Undergraduate
    • Graduate
    • Education Conferences
    • Ethics Case Studies
  • International Affairs
  • Physics Outreach
  • Women in Physics
  • Minorities in Physics
  • Prizes, Awards & Fellows

Email Email   Print Print     Share Share
 
Home   |   Programs   |   Education   |   Ethics Case Studies   |   Publication Practices   |   Fabrication, Falsification, and Plagiarism

Fabrication, Falsification, and Plagiarism

Description of the Problem

You are a co-author on a recent paper that was rejected. The referee made a couple of good points that called into question a section of the paper. The lead author, a fellow graduate student, is responsible for rewriting this section of the paper.

When you read the new version, you see that he has changed some of the numbers to address the referee comments. His response to the referee is that upon double-checking the data, there was indeed a mistake, and the referee was correct in noticing something was amiss. 

This student hopes to graduate within the next year, and you are aware that he is desperate to publish something before starting a job search. You are skeptical of your lab-mate’s explanation for the error, but don’t have any specific knowledge of wrongdoing.


Question

What should you do?

Gray arrow Fabrication, Falsification, and Plagiarism Discussion


Alternative Problem

A PI, who is desperate to publish in order to secure a grant renewal, has just been told by his junior student of concerns about the above paper. How might or should a PI in this situation respond to this concern?
Home | APS Jobs | Media Center | Terms of Use | Site Map

Follow APS: Feeds Facebook LinkedIn Wordpress Twitter Google Plus YouTube

© 2013 American Physical Society