I remember in one of my science classes one day my teacher said "I noticed some of you turned in assignments where all the data points fit within expected parameters and almost perfectly fit the hypothesis. I watched all of you during the assignment...next time please do not pick-and-choose your equipment readings."
He was right; some of the students misunderstood the assignment and scrambled to rerun the tests, a few others really wanted that A.
A lot of the time I don't even think its malicious, its people are so trained by the education system to think "being wrong" means "zero points." So when their data starts coming back as disproving their hypothesis, they think it'll be a failure and panic.
But regardless of the reason, it undermines almost all studies they do when they show themselves willing to fudge data to protect their appearance/grade/ego.
I remember in one of my science classes one day my teacher said "I noticed some of you turned in assignments where all the data points fit within expected parameters and almost perfectly fit the hypothesis. I watched all of you during the assignment...next time please do not pick-and-choose your equipment readings."
He was right; some of the students misunderstood the assignment and scrambled to rerun the tests, a few others really wanted that A.
A lot of the time I don't even think its malicious, its people are so trained by the education system to think "being wrong" means "zero points." So when their data starts coming back as disproving their hypothesis, they think it'll be a failure and panic.
But regardless of the reason, it undermines almost all studies they do when they show themselves willing to fudge data to protect their appearance/grade/ego.