As it’s own research, and should admission

As you see from obokata
issue , she lacks a sense of research ethics, Manipulating the data
and images from other articles and experiments and used them in her articles is
not accepted behavior from a scientist researcher. we must awareness people
about the the ethics of research from fabrication and manipulation of data and scientific
misconduct and learn from this, every one must be responsible of it’s own
research, and should admission of scientific
guilt , and gives apologist from this misconduct.

In my opinion maybe there’s many reasons that’s lead obokata
to this level of misconduct, it could be bias in the interpretation of facts
and inadequate communication of results and methods.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

 she has spent  long hours in her experiment, growing,
manipulating and testing cells in  differents
way, and she sense with every hypothesis there’s a hunch in mind and he has
strong sense about what she expected . and she really want to prove that her
sense or lunch  is right, that the money was
invested into her work was well spent, she to
get ahead in competitive field, where the pressure to perform can be intense. But she get her results and she surprised  her results are disappointing, And she need to
do is count something a little creatively. And when she get rid of the original
data, But once she  start fiddling with the facts, it’s hard to
stop. In part, that’s because she thought  how easy it is to fool her  colleagues. Also she  has enjoyed their admiration and she  improved chances of being published,Maybe this
reason pushes obokata to this misconduct.

 In my opinion the
journals editors should investigate the papers by themselves, Nature should be provided with the details of the Riken
investigation, and carefully considering them . Nature
 should evaluate whether the evidence
available supports the main conclusions of the paper. And then decide to
withdrawal 2 papers in cases where the authors cannot provide evidence to
support the main conclusions of the paper.