What does the topic mean?
Our topic connects the fields of science and research with a focus on the tolerance of misconduct. At the center lies the academic peer-review process, widely regarded as the cornerstone of quality assurance in scientific publishing. In this process, independent researchers decide whether a submitted manuscript is suitable for publication.
Despite being considered the gold standard, this system repeatedly allows serious violations to slip through – including fabricated data, methodologically weak studies, or even fake peer reviews. A prominent example is the scandal surrounding social psychologist Diederik Stapel: his entirely fabricated data was published for years without intervention from reviewers.
These cases clearly show that misconduct is not only committed – it is also tolerated. And that is precisely where our focus lies. We ask: Why do peer reviewers remain silent, even when they could – or should – speak up? And how can this passive behavior be changed? Our project therefore addresses a sensitive point in the scientific system: the moment where review is supposed to happen, but too often, does not happen thoroughly enough.
