Two of the cornerstones of scientific advancement are rigour in design and conduct of scientific research and the ability to reproduce research findings. Therefore, scientific results need to be robust, unbiased and valid across a broad set of situations. A precondition to attain these is that a scientific study should follow rigorous standards in design, methodology, data collection, analysis, interpretation and reporting
of results.

In recent times, we have seen newspaper headlines pertaining to scientific papers containing manipulated images as well as research papers being repeatedly retracted. These developments indicate compromises with scientific rigour and ethics as many scientists are adopting dishonest means while publishing their results in research papers.

Scientific rigour and ethics are primarily practised by an individual scientist. However, the scientific community has also evolved ways of adopting appropriate, rigorous and ethical methods. For instance, before undertaking a scientific study involving humans or animals, the purpose and plan of the study have to be reviewed and approved by an Institutional Ethics Committee that not only comprises scientists but also lawyers, philosophers or ethicists, and lay persons. After the study is approved and carried out, the investigator submits the results in a written form (called a ‘paper’) and submits it for publication to a journal. The journal then sends the paper for ‘peer review’. If the reviewers recommend publication of the paper, only then does the journal publish it. After it is published, the paper gets into the public domain so that other scientists and the public can learn about the study and its conclusions.

Yet, transgressions take place. A scientist can purposely engage in falsification. Sometimes, a scientist deliberately compromises with rigour by analysing only such data that appear compatible with the proposed theory. Plagiarism, manipulation of peer reviewers, not declaring conflicts of interest, misrepresentation of authorship, among other malpractices, are not uncommon.

Fortunately, the proverbial black sheep among scientists do get caught and the fraudulent publication is retracted. In 1998, Andrew Wakefield and his colleagues published a paper in The Lancet in which they claimed that children who were administered the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine had a higher predisposition towards autism. MMR vaccination rates dropped consequently. After a series of subsequent studies failed to find a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, and after a formal investigation by the General Medical Council, which is responsible for licensing doctors and supervising medical ethics in the United Kingdom, The Lancet retracted the paper. The GMC investigation revealed that Wakefield had engaged in various unethical acts, including financial conflict of interest, conducting
the study without approval of an institutional ethics committee, and data manipulation.

Since 2013, there has been a steady rise in the number of retracted papers. However, the figure jumped to over 10,000 in 2023 from about 5,800 in 2022. This certainly
is an indication of the compromising attitude of scientists towards rigour and ethics.

What may be incentives for scientists to engage in fraudulent acts? Faculty appointments and promotions are the most likely incentives. The National Institutional Ranking Framework also emphasises on the number of publications. The rise in predatory journals and their aggressive solicitation of papers make it easy for a scientist to increase the number of publications.

For Viksit Bharat to produce scientific excellence of high quality, not just quantity, it is important to provide punitive measures against violators of rigour and ethics in science.

This article is based on the author’s inaugural lecture delivered on May 9, 2025 at the 62nd State Conference of the Kerala Sasthra Sahithya Parishad held in Palakkad.

Partha P. Majumder is National Science Chair (Scientific Excellence), SERB, Government of India