中國(guó)科研的不發(fā)表就滅亡（轉(zhuǎn)載）

animalchem

轉(zhuǎn)載如下：
中國(guó)科研的不發(fā)表就滅亡
　　有人說(shuō)，湊高影響期刊論文篇數(shù)的壓力很可能會(huì)助長(zhǎng)學(xué)術(shù)不端。

　　英國(guó)《自然》463, 142-143 (2010)
　　記者：Jane Qiu
　　翻譯：clark

　　在中國(guó)一系列引人注目的學(xué)術(shù)造假案件中，最近的一起更凸顯了一個(gè)過(guò)度強(qiáng)
調(diào)發(fā)表的學(xué)術(shù)評(píng)價(jià)體系的問(wèn)題，批評(píng)人士這樣說(shuō)道。上個(gè)月，英國(guó)的《結(jié)晶學(xué)報(bào)
（E）》的編輯一次性撤消了70篇已經(jīng)發(fā)表的晶體結(jié)構(gòu)——編輯們斷言這些晶體
結(jié)構(gòu)是江西省井岡山大學(xué)的研究人員編造出來(lái)的。而且以后可能還會(huì)有更多的撤
消。

　　對(duì)于那些能吸引眼球的發(fā)表，中國(guó)大學(xué)經(jīng)常給與現(xiàn)金獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)，住房?jī)?yōu)惠和其他
外快；而發(fā)表的壓力也是與日俱增。比如，武漢大學(xué)的一項(xiàng)最新研究估計(jì)，諸如
找槍手炮制論文等買賣論文與經(jīng)營(yíng)非法學(xué)術(shù)期刊活動(dòng)僅在2009年市值已達(dá)十億，
五倍于2007年的數(shù)字。在其他的研究中，來(lái)自主要大學(xué)和研究機(jī)構(gòu)的被調(diào)查研究
人員有三分之一承認(rèn)有過(guò)剽竊、篡改、編造數(shù)據(jù)的行為。

　　“學(xué)術(shù)不端已經(jīng)到了令人不安的程度，”安阿堡的密西根大學(xué)研究倫理與誠(chéng)
信項(xiàng)目的負(fù)責(zé)人Nicholas Steneck說(shuō)：“這集中體現(xiàn)了中國(guó)在爭(zhēng)取迅速地提高研
究地位，試圖成為科學(xué)界世界級(jí)選手的過(guò)程中所面臨的挑戰(zhàn)。而在中國(guó)這樣一個(gè)
巨大的研究體系當(dāng)中，研究質(zhì)量自然是良莠不齊的……”

　　作為對(duì)結(jié)晶學(xué)論文被撤消的回應(yīng)，兩周前井岡山大學(xué)開除了論文的兩位通訊
作者—鐘華和劉濤?，F(xiàn)在還不清楚他們的共同作者，其中包括來(lái)自中國(guó)其他研究
機(jī)構(gòu)的研究人員，是否會(huì)被調(diào)查。

　　這份期刊的編輯說(shuō)，在測(cè)試一款用來(lái)標(biāo)識(shí)潛在錯(cuò)誤和罕見化學(xué)結(jié)構(gòu)（比如，
原子間不正常的距離）的軟件時(shí)，這些論文露出了馬腳。這款軟件確認(rèn)了大量在
化學(xué)上根本說(shuō)不過(guò)去的晶體結(jié)構(gòu)。在進(jìn)一步的核實(shí)表明，編輯說(shuō)，論文的作者僅
僅置換了現(xiàn)存化合物已知結(jié)構(gòu)中一兩個(gè)原子的位置，就把它們作為新的結(jié)構(gòu)提交
了?，F(xiàn)在無(wú)法聯(lián)絡(luò)到鐘華和劉濤來(lái)聽取他們的申訴。

　　期刊的編輯們正在檢查其他已經(jīng)發(fā)表的晶體結(jié)構(gòu)的真實(shí)性，包括所有來(lái)自井
岡山大學(xué)的投稿。

　　在這份期刊過(guò)去五年所發(fā)表的所有二十萬(wàn)余種晶體結(jié)構(gòu)中，一半來(lái)自中國(guó)。
E卷的三名編輯之一，來(lái)自英國(guó)阿伯丁大學(xué)的化學(xué)家William Harrison不愿意討
論正在進(jìn)行當(dāng)中的調(diào)查，但他說(shuō)由一個(gè)研究團(tuán)隊(duì)產(chǎn)生出大量晶體結(jié)構(gòu)并不一定有
問(wèn)題，因?yàn)檠苌鋬x一天很容易就可以收集幾個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)集?！熬屯兜紼卷的論文來(lái)說(shuō)，
從中國(guó)來(lái)的大部分都是測(cè)定正確的結(jié)構(gòu)，他們對(duì)科學(xué)做出了有價(jià)值的貢獻(xiàn)”，他
又說(shuō)道。

　　但是，武漢大學(xué)的研究表明學(xué)術(shù)不端行為在很多領(lǐng)域都廣泛傳播。計(jì)算機(jī)專
家沈陽(yáng)所領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的小組運(yùn)用網(wǎng)站分析和實(shí)地調(diào)查確定了一大批非法出版活動(dòng)。其中
包括槍手代寫的文章和憑空捏造的論文，通過(guò)賄賂逃避評(píng)審以及干脆偽造合法出
版的的中國(guó)期刊和國(guó)際期刊。

　　研究人員分析了干這些非法營(yíng)生的最熱門的800家網(wǎng)站——他們的點(diǎn)擊量一
天就能累積到二十一萬(wàn)次，發(fā)現(xiàn)每筆交易通常是六百到一千兩百元人民幣。沈陽(yáng)
說(shuō)，其中四分之三的需求來(lái)自大學(xué)和研究機(jī)構(gòu)，“整個(gè)出版過(guò)程就是一個(gè)巨大的
產(chǎn)業(yè)鏈”。

　　出于對(duì)這種趨勢(shì)的擔(dān)心，中國(guó)科技部委托進(jìn)行了一項(xiàng)針對(duì)研究人員的調(diào)查。
雖然調(diào)查結(jié)果尚未公開，但有些來(lái)源對(duì)《自然》透露：超過(guò)6000名遍及六家頂級(jí)
研究機(jī)構(gòu)的被調(diào)查者當(dāng)中大約三分之一的人承認(rèn)有過(guò)剽竊、篡改和編造行為。參
與這項(xiàng)調(diào)查的清華大學(xué)科技與社會(huì)研究所所長(zhǎng)曾國(guó)平說(shuō)，許多人將這些不端行為
的首要原因歸結(jié)為急功近利的文化。

　　第二個(gè)經(jīng)常被提及的原因是，在中國(guó)學(xué)術(shù)活動(dòng)受到官僚的干涉。大多數(shù)學(xué)術(shù)
評(píng)估，從人員聘用、職稱晉升到基金分配，都是由官僚完成的，而他們都不是相
關(guān)領(lǐng)域的專家，方是民（方舟子）這樣解釋。方是民是一位曾在美國(guó)接受學(xué)術(shù)訓(xùn)
練的生化專家，現(xiàn)在開辦一個(gè)名為“新語(yǔ)絲”的網(wǎng)站，專門揭露中國(guó)的學(xué)術(shù)不端
行為。“由于官僚把持，數(shù)論文的數(shù)目，而不是評(píng)價(jià)研究的質(zhì)量，成了評(píng)估的常
態(tài)，”方是民如是說(shuō)。

　　曾國(guó)平在清華大學(xué)的同事曹南燕，由北京市政府委托也開展了一項(xiàng)相似的調(diào)
查，調(diào)查了來(lái)自10所大學(xué)和研究機(jī)構(gòu)的2000名研究人員。結(jié)果也發(fā)現(xiàn)在答復(fù)問(wèn)卷
的人中有三分之一承認(rèn)有過(guò)違規(guī)的學(xué)術(shù)不端行為。

　　在北京大學(xué)生命學(xué)院院長(zhǎng)饒毅這樣的批評(píng)者看來(lái)，缺乏對(duì)造假者嚴(yán)厲的制裁
措施，即使在引人矚目的案件當(dāng)中也付之闕如，是學(xué)術(shù)欺詐猖獗的原因之一。上
海交通大學(xué)的一位前院長(zhǎng)陳進(jìn)曾被指控謊稱制造出一系列的數(shù)字信號(hào)處理芯片，
但除了被解聘以外沒有任何其他后果。同時(shí)，卷入這件丑聞中的其他人員也是毫
發(fā)未損依然如故。許多研究人員對(duì)這一事實(shí)進(jìn)行了批評(píng)。

　　饒毅說(shuō)：“這樣令人側(cè)目的丑聞都沒有得到應(yīng)有的處理，那就是發(fā)出了一個(gè)
非常錯(cuò)誤的信號(hào)?！?br />
Published online 12 January 2010 | Nature  463, 142-143 (2010) |
doi:10.1038/463142a


原文如下：
Publish or perish in China

The pressure to rack up publications in high-impact journals could
encourage misconduct, some say.

Jane Qiu

The latest in a string of high-profile academic fraud cases in China
underscores the problems of an academic-evaluation system that places
disproportionate emphasis on publications, critics say. Editors at the
UK-based journal Acta Crystallographica Section E last month retracted
70 published crystal structures that they allege are fabrications by
researchers at Jinggangshan University in Jiangxi province. Further
retractions, the editors say, are likely.

Chinese universities often award cash prizes, housing benefits or
other perks on the basis of high-profile publications, and the
pressure to publish seems to be growing. A new study from Wuhan
University, for instance, estimates that the market for dubious
science-publishing activities, such as ghostwriting papers on
nonexistent research, was of the order of 1 billion renminbi (US$150
million) in 2009 — five times the amount in 2007. In other studies,
one in three researchers surveyed at major universities and research
institutions admitted to committing plagiarism, falsification or
fabrication of data.

"The extent of the misconduct is disturbing," says Nicholas Steneck,
director of the Research Ethics and Integrity Program at the
University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. "It highlights the challenges
China faces as it struggles to rapidly improve the research capacity
of a very large system — with significant variations in quality — to
be a world-class player in science."

Two weeks ago, reacting to the retractions of the crystallography
papers, Jinggangshang University fired the correspondent authors,
Zhong Hua and Liu Tao. It is unclear whether their co-authors, who
include researchers from other institutions in China, will also be
investigated.

The journal's editors say that the discrepancies came to light during
tests of software designed to flag possible errors and unusual
chemical features, such as abnormal distances between atoms. The
software identified a large number of crystal structures that didn't
make sense chemically; further checking, the editors say, suggests
that the authors simply changed one or more atoms of an existing
compound of known structure, then presented that structure as new.
Zhong and Liu could not be reached for comment.

Editors at the journal are now checking the authenticity of other
published crystal structures, including all submissions from
Jinggangshan University.

Half of the 200,000-odd crystal structures published by the journal
during the past five years have come from China. William Harrison, a
chemist at the University of Aberdeen, UK, who is one of three section
editors for the journal, would not discuss the ongoing investigation
but says that the generation of large numbers of structures by one
group would not necessarily raise questions, because diffractometers
can easily collect a couple of data sets a day. "In terms of papers
submitted to Acta E, the vast majority coming from China are correctly
determined structures, and they make a valuable contribution to
science," he says.

Nevertheless, the Wuhan University study suggests that misconduct
could be widespread in many fields. The team, led by computer
scientist Shen Yang, used website analyses and onsite investigations
to identify a wide range of dubious publishing activities. These
include ghostwriting theses and academic papers on fictional research,
bypassing peer-review for payment, and forging copies of legitimate
Chinese or international journals.

The researchers analysed the most popular 800 websites involved in
such activities — which together rack up 210,000 hits a day — and
found that the cost of each transaction is typically 600–12,000
renminbi. Three-quarters of the demand comes from universities and
institutions, says Shen. "There is a massive production chain for the
entire publishing process," he says.

Concerned by such trends, China's science ministry commissioned a
survey of researchers, the results of which remain under wraps. However,
several sources revealed to Nature that roughly one-third of more than
6,000 surveyed across six top institutions admitted to plagiarism,
falsification or fabrication. Many blamed the culture of jigong jinli
— seeking quick success and short-term gain — as the top reason for
such practices, says Zeng Guopin, director of the Institute of Science
Technology and Society at Tsinghua University in Beijing who was
involved in running the survey.

The second most-cited cause is bureaucratic interference in academic
activities in China. Most academic evaluation — from staff employment
and job promotion to funding allocation — is carried out by
bureaucrats who are not experts in the field in question, says Fang
Shimin, a US-trained biochemist who runs a website called 'New
Threads' that exposes research misconduct in China. "When that happens,
counting the number of publications, rather than assessing the quality
of research, becomes the norm of evaluation," he says.

Cao Nanyan, a colleague of Zeng's at Tsinghua, conducted a similar
survey commissioned by the Beijing municipality, which surveyed 2,000
researchers from 10 universities and research institutions. It, too,
found that roughly one-third of respondents admitted to illegitimate
practices.

To critics such as Rao Yi, dean of the life-science school at Peking
University in Beijing, the lack of severe sanctions for fraudsters,
even in high-profile cases, also contributes to rampant academic fraud.
Many researchers criticize the fact that Chen Jin, a former researcher
at Shanghai Jiao Tong University who is accused of falsely claiming to
have developed a series of digital signal-processing chips, was fired
with no other repercussions. Meanwhile, others involved in the scandal
have gone unpunished.

"You send out a very wrong signal when such high-profile cases are not
dealt with properly," says Rao.

sunmanji

中國(guó)學(xué)者應(yīng)引以為戒！

sjhy620926

學(xué)術(shù)不端非常厲害，我的某篇優(yōu)秀論文就被人抄去申報(bào)職稱了。

jiakang

厲害,學(xué)術(shù)是要潛下心來(lái),踏實(shí)創(chuàng)新的.........

tom147145111

呵呵
啥話也不想講
現(xiàn)在社會(huì)就這樣

search666

昨天看到中央電視臺(tái)經(jīng)濟(jì)頻道《中國(guó)腳步》節(jié)目，一頂中國(guó)制造的帽子在國(guó)外賣到十幾美元，而中國(guó)企業(yè)出口價(jià)格僅一美元，我們付出了大部分的勞動(dòng)卻得到極其微薄的回報(bào)，別人吃肉我們只有喝點(diǎn)湯的份！一部汽車的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)、轉(zhuǎn)向、制動(dòng)和電路等核心系統(tǒng)技術(shù)我們國(guó)產(chǎn)品牌與國(guó)外品牌的差距不可想象，我們只不過(guò)是一個(gè)中國(guó)制造的世界加工廠，根本沒有核心技術(shù)，所以也就沒有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力。
    有差距并不怕，關(guān)鍵是要迎頭趕上，政府早已意識(shí)到這一問(wèn)題，早在鄧小平時(shí)期就提出了‘科技是第一生產(chǎn)力’的偉大方針，近年政府也一直在強(qiáng)調(diào)提高自主創(chuàng)新能力，提高核心競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力，并投入大量的資金、人力物力，國(guó)家重視并投入關(guān)鍵是這些資源有沒有用到該用的地方？我們的大學(xué)、科研機(jī)構(gòu)是不是在真正的踏踏實(shí)實(shí)的搞這些工作？有多少人真正在搞？
    提高核心競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力不是一朝一夕就能夠達(dá)到的目標(biāo)，需要一代人甚至是幾代人的默默付出，連續(xù)空缺兩年的自然科學(xué)獎(jiǎng)一等獎(jiǎng)今年終于有了得主，獲獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)目為由中科院植物研究所錢崇澍、崔鴻賓等人完成的“《中國(guó)植物志》的編研”，過(guò)去十年中，該獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)累積空缺七次?！吨袊?guó)植物志》的編纂歷時(shí)45年，由幾代人完成的巨作，包含有5000多萬(wàn)字，收入31000多種植物，是目前世界上最大、最完整的一份植物志。遺憾的是，獲獎(jiǎng)時(shí)，錢崇澍、崔鴻賓早已過(guò)世。
    真正的成果只有具備這樣的淡泊名利，專心科研的精神才能做出來(lái)的，現(xiàn)在像這樣的科研工作者太少了，少的都可以申請(qǐng)國(guó)家級(jí)保護(hù)了！

天牛行空

學(xué)術(shù)造假就如假冒商品一樣，要嚴(yán)厲打擊?。?！

tanhao121811

畢竟，科研不是那么容易就出來(lái)的~

養(yǎng)殖小干事

現(xiàn)在就這個(gè)氛圍，難 啊

panjianwen1982

引以為戒呀