The first aim of this website is to make information about the reliability of scientific publications easily available by listing on the web the articles for which fraud, falsification and plagiarism (FFP) was demonstrated. The focus is on fraudulent articles and not scientists. Then arise several issues: how to decide which articles to list? And after all, is it legally authorized to make this information public?

The first question is very practical as it is required to fulfill the aim of the website. So far, some special committees, within universities and funding agencies, are able to investigate the « FFP » cases and assess whether or not there was misconduct. We hence decided to use reports produced by such committees to guarantee about the fraudulent nature of a publication. However, while searching for examples of misconduct, we soon realized that lots of scientific institutions didn't even have such committees, and that the existing committees had a narrow scope. For instance, a committee within a university can only work on cases within this university, and similarly for a funding agency. Moreover, each committee seems to have its own way of working: some display their reports whereas other keep everything secret.

These restrictions are well-known from people working on this subject. Several discussions with specialists made us realize that what is as stake here is very often related to the fuzziness of scientific misconduct, legally speaking. Indeed the fact that scientific misconduct is not recognised within the legal system makes it difficult to get information about misconduct cases, and also lowers the impact of codes of good practices, which might be considered as mere indications but not as duties.

Fortunately, beside the court, other options exist. For instance, in France, several professions have their specific “professional deontology”, a code acknowledged by the State that defines rights and duties, principles and rules, for a given profession. In this sense, a code of deontology is stronger than a mere code of ethics or code of good practices, in that it is recognized by the French legal system. Such codes exist for different professions, the most known being for physicians, and a specific council monitors the cases of misconduct.

Thus, we have several questions for you: do such « code of deontology » exist in your country? Do you think it would be useful to write such a code for researchers? How to consider this issue within the different administrative and legal contexts?

As usual, opinions and comments are much welcome!