{"id":57044,"date":"2025-12-02T17:50:39","date_gmt":"2025-12-02T11:50:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/academy\/?p=57044"},"modified":"2026-05-08T07:19:15","modified_gmt":"2026-05-08T07:19:15","slug":"types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/","title":{"rendered":"Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong><!-- Introduction Section --><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>A growing number of retractions and high-profile exposures have focused attention on the many faces of scientific fraud and on the limits of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/peer-review-process\" data-internallinksmanager029f6b8e52c=\"26\" title=\"Peer Review\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">peer review<\/a> to catch them before publication.<\/strong> Understanding common fraud types, why some slip through review, and how detection differs before and after publication helps researchers, reviewers, and administrators design more effective checks and prevent reputational and scientific harm. This article defines the principal types of fraud, assesses which are likeliest to evade <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/peer-review-process\" data-internallinksmanager029f6b8e52c=\"26\" title=\"Peer Review\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">peer review<\/a>, and contrasts the practical challenges of detecting misconduct at the review stage versus after wider dissemination.<\/p>\n<p><!-- Types of scientific fraud: definitions and examples Section --><\/p>\n<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 counter-flat ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"#\" data-href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#Types_of_scientific_fraud_definitions_and_examples\" >Types of scientific fraud: definitions and examples<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"#\" data-href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#Which_frauds_are_most_likely_to_pass_unnoticed_in_peer_review\" >Which frauds are most likely to pass unnoticed in peer review?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"#\" data-href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#Why_peer_review_struggles_to_catch_fraud_practical_constraints\" >Why peer review struggles to catch fraud: practical constraints<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"#\" data-href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#Why_detection_improves_after_publication\" >Why detection improves after publication<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"#\" data-href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#Practical_steps_for_authors_reviewers_and_journals\" >Practical steps for authors, reviewers and journals<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"#\" data-href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#Checklist_for_submission-ready_integrity\" >Checklist for submission-ready integrity<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"#\" data-href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#Conclusion_and_next_steps\" >Conclusion and next steps<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Types_of_scientific_fraud_definitions_and_examples\"><\/span><strong>Types of scientific fraud: definitions and examples<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<!-- INLINE SERVICE CARD: Plagiarism Checker -->\r\n    <div class=\"svc\">\r\n    <div class=\"svc-body\">\r\n      <div class=\"svc-cat\">Research Integrity \r\n        <!-- <span class=\"svc-free\">Free<\/span> -->\r\n      <\/div>\r\n      <div class=\"svc-row\">\r\n        <div class=\"svc-ic\">\r\n          <svg viewBox=\"0 0 200 200\" fill=\"none\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\">\r\n            <g clip-path=\"url(#cp-plag-inline)\">\r\n              <path d=\"M140.26 34.7119H35.7568V39.9202H140.26V34.7119Z\" fill=\"white\"><\/path>\r\n              <path d=\"M82.7998 56.3525H35.7568V61.5609H82.7998V56.3525Z\" fill=\"white\"><\/path>\r\n              <path d=\"M66.8388 77.9932H35.7568V83.2015H66.8388V77.9932Z\" fill=\"white\"><\/path>\r\n              <path d=\"M163.778 180.88V195.262H155.411H20.5653H12.1983V4.7379H20.5653H155.411H163.778V128.595H168.011V0H155.411H20.5653H7.99805V200H20.5653H155.411H168.011V180.88H163.778Z\" fill=\"white\"><\/path>\r\n              <path d=\"M142.756 99.0334C138.521 95.029 134.41 90.706 129.718 87.4296C120.459 80.9679 110.327 78.1465 99.4068 81.2864C88.3203 84.4718 79.5175 91.5706 72.002 100.854V102.446H75.8635C77.3999 104.267 79.2684 106.724 81.4276 108.908C87.5729 115.142 94.9639 118.692 103.227 119.966C103.601 120.011 111.49 120.011 111.947 119.966C118.133 119.42 124.03 117.509 129.054 113.595C133.372 110.228 137.234 106.132 141.428 102.264H144.002C143.587 101.172 143.462 99.716 142.715 99.0334H142.756ZM107.711 115.643C95.9189 115.643 86.6179 109.818 79.7667 99.3065C96.6248 80.1033 117.677 78.9201 136.32 99.2155C129.386 110.137 119.711 115.643 107.711 115.688V115.643Z\" fill=\"white\"><\/path>\r\n              <path d=\"M107.601 92.0023C103.648 92.0472 100.184 95.5428 100.007 99.7106C99.8289 104.237 103.293 107.912 107.867 108.002C112.175 108.046 115.817 104.685 115.994 100.383C116.172 95.8565 112.219 91.9575 107.556 92.0023H107.601ZM107.956 105.671C104.714 105.626 102.227 103.027 102.36 99.8003C102.494 96.8424 104.936 94.3776 107.734 94.3327C111.02 94.3327 113.818 97.0665 113.729 100.293C113.596 103.341 111.02 105.761 107.956 105.671Z\" fill=\"white\"><\/path>\r\n              <path d=\"M185.519 165.491L148.322 128.293C154.504 120.06 158.201 109.845 158.201 98.7903C158.201 71.5725 136.057 49.4287 108.839 49.4287C81.6214 49.4287 59.4775 71.5725 59.4775 98.7903C59.4775 126.008 81.6214 148.152 108.839 148.152C119.894 148.152 130.076 144.456 138.342 138.273L175.539 175.47L185.519 165.491ZM64.2154 98.7903C64.2154 74.1599 84.2423 54.133 108.873 54.133C133.503 54.133 153.53 74.1599 153.53 98.7903C153.53 123.421 133.503 143.448 108.873 143.448C84.2423 143.448 64.2154 123.421 64.2154 98.7903ZM143.08 134.274C143.517 133.871 143.92 133.468 144.323 133.031C144.659 132.661 145.029 132.359 145.365 131.989L178.866 165.491L175.539 168.817L142.038 135.316C142.408 134.98 142.71 134.61 143.08 134.274Z\" fill=\"white\"><\/path>\r\n            <\/g>\r\n            <defs><clipPath id=\"cp-plag-inline\"><rect width=\"177.52\" height=\"200\" fill=\"white\" transform=\"translate(7.99805)\"><\/rect><\/clipPath><\/defs>\r\n          <\/svg>\r\n        <\/div>\r\n        <h4>Submit with complete integrity \u2014 every time.<\/h4>\r\n      <\/div>\r\n      <p class=\"svc-desc\">Powered by iThenticate and checked against 47 billion web pages, 190 million paywalled articles, and 200+ million open access works \u2014 the most comprehensive check available before submission.<\/p>\r\n      <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/plagiarism-checker\/\" class=\"svc-btn\" target=\"_blank\">Get Plagiarism Report \u2192<\/a>\r\n    <\/div>\r\n  <\/div>\r\n    \n<h3><strong>Fabrication:<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Fabrication is the invention of data, observations, or results that were never obtained. Fabricated datasets or entire experiments present a complete absence of verifiable raw material and are among the most serious forms of misconduct.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Falsification and selective reporting:<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Falsification alters or omits data, manipulates experimental conditions, or tweaks analyses to produce desired outcomes. Closely related is selective reporting or \u201ccherry-picking\u201d of favorable results while omitting null or conflicting findings. These practices distort the record while preserving a surface layer of plausible data.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Image falsification:<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Image manipulation encompasses duplication, splicing, contrast\/brightness alterations that obscure features, and the insertion or removal of image elements. In fields that rely heavily on images (e.g., molecular biology, radiology), manipulated figures can convey false experimental support. Recent <a href=\"https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/science\/article\/pii\/S0720048X25003092\">surveys<\/a> and analyses indicate image issues are a nontrivial contributor to integrity investigations.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Plagiarism:<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Plagiarism ranges from verbatim copying to mosaic or patchwork plagiarism and self-plagiarism. Many journals use text-matching software (e.g., iThenticate) to screen submissions, but paraphrased or translated plagiarism can evade simple matches.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Authorship and contribution fraud:<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>This category includes fabricated authors, \u201cghost\u201d authorship (uncredited contributors), honorary or gift authorship, and forged authorship declarations. It also covers fake peer-review schemes in which suggested reviewers are fabricated or review contacts are hijacked to produce fraudulent reviews. Such manipulations subvert editorial systems rather than the scientific data itself.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Paper mills and template fraud:<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Paper mills produce otherwise plausible but fraudulent manuscripts at scale sometimes reusing data, images, or fabricated experiments, and selling authorship positions. Paper-mill output can be stylistically consistent and superficially coherent, making detection difficult without data or provenance checks.<\/p>\n<p><!-- Which frauds are most likely to pass unnoticed in peer review Section --><\/p>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Which_frauds_are_most_likely_to_pass_unnoticed_in_peer_review\"><\/span><strong>Which frauds are most likely to pass unnoticed in peer review?<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Several fraud types are inherently harder for peer reviewers to detect. Fabrication can be especially stealthy when a manuscript includes plausible methods, consistent-looking results, and no request for raw data. Peer reviewers typically evaluate logic, methodology, and interpretation rather than raw datasets; without mandatory access to primary data, fabricated numbers may appear credible. The Retraction Watch\u2013based analyses and bibliometric <a href=\"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s40979-025-00193-8\">studies<\/a> show many misconduct cases are not discovered until post-publication analysis or external whistleblowing, consistent with the difficulty of spotting wholly invented data during review.<\/p>\n<p>Paper-mill manuscripts and fake <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/peer-review-process\" data-internallinksmanager029f6b8e52c=\"26\" title=\"Peer Review\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">peer review<\/a> can also pass editorial filters when they mimic expected structure and language and when editorial systems trust author-suggested reviewers. Journal processes that allow unverified reviewer contacts create an attack surface for reviewer fraud; mass-produced papers that reuse formulaic text and images may escape cursory checks. Empirical reports document large batches of retractions linked to fabricated reviews and paper-mill activity.<\/p>\n<p>Subtle data falsification or selective reporting may evade reviewers because it often requires reanalysis or access to raw datasets to detect inconsistencies, which are not routinely requested. In contrast, overt plagiarism copy-paste of large text blocks frequently triggers similarity checks and is among the problems most often caught pre-publication. However, paraphrased or cleverly reworked plagiarism can still slip by automated detection.<\/p>\n<p>Image manipulation occupies a middle ground. Simple duplications or reused images may be detectable by attentive reviewers or routine image checks, and specialized image-forensics tools can identify duplications or splices. But sophisticated manipulations (small splices, localized retouching, or generated images) are <a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2102.01874\">easier to miss<\/a> without dedicated screening tools and trained staff. Recent technological work has improved automated image screening, but implementation across journals is uneven.<\/p>\n<p><!-- Why peer review struggles to catch fraud: practical constraints Section --><\/p>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Why_peer_review_struggles_to_catch_fraud_practical_constraints\"><\/span><strong>Why peer review struggles to catch fraud: practical constraints<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Time and scope:<\/strong> Reviewers are typically unpaid volunteers focused on methodological soundness and novelty; they rarely have time to re-run analyses or examine raw image files in depth. Editors must balance speed and rigor, and resource-intensive forensic screening is not standard for most journals.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Access to primary materials:<\/strong> Raw data, code, lab notebooks and original image files are often unavailable at submission. When primary data are not deposited in repositories, reviewers lack the evidence needed to verify results.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Expertise mismatch:<\/strong> Reviewers evaluate content within their domain but may not have forensic expertise in image analysis, statistics, or data provenance. Small anomalies that require statistical or computational scrutiny can be missed.<\/li>\n<li><strong>System vulnerabilities:<\/strong> Editorial workflows that accept author-suggested reviewers or lack identity verification are vulnerable to manipulation. Likewise, journals without mandatory checks for plagiarism, image duplication, or data availability leave gaps that can be exploited. Evidence from several retraction waves shows peer-review manipulation and fake reviews underpin many <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/journals\/journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics\/article\/abs\/retractions-of-covid19related-research-publications-during-and-after-the-pandemic\/DB251754B6349E7E928CE71CD022A396\">mass retractions<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><!-- Why detection improves after publication Section --><\/p>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Why_detection_improves_after_publication\"><\/span><strong>Why detection improves after publication<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Broader scrutiny:<\/strong> Once published, a paper is exposed to the entire scientific community. Platforms such as PubPeer, social media, and formal whistleblowing channels enable crowdsourced scrutiny; sustained attention can reveal inconsistencies missed during <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/peer-review-process\" data-internallinksmanager029f6b8e52c=\"26\" title=\"Peer Review\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">peer review<\/a>. Notable image analysts and watchdogs have helped <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wired.com\/story\/scientific-fraud-is-slippery-to-catch-but-easier-to-combat\/\">detect manipulation post-publication<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Data and replication attempts:<\/strong> Independent groups attempting to replicate findings or reanalyze shared data often uncover irreproducibility or anomalies, leading to expressions of concern or retractions. Post-publication use can expose a flawed study\u2019s downstream impact and highlight the need for correction.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Forensic tools at scale:<\/strong> Publishers and community projects deploy large-scale text-mining, image-forensics, and statistical-screening tools that operate across corpora; these tools can detect patterns (e.g., <a href=\"https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/science\/article\/pii\/S1076633222003713\">duplicated images<\/a> across many papers) that are invisible to single reviewers. Cross-journal <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/science\/2024\/feb\/03\/the-situation-has-become-appalling-fake-scientific-papers-push-research-credibility-to-crisis-point\">analysis<\/a> has exposed paper-mill output and serial offender patterns.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><!-- Practical steps for authors, reviewers and journals Section --><\/p>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Practical_steps_for_authors_reviewers_and_journals\"><\/span><strong>Practical steps for authors, reviewers and journals<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Authors<\/strong> should deposit raw data, analysis code, and original high-resolution image files in trusted repositories, use ORCID and CRediT contributor statements, and disclose AI or third-party assistance. These practices reduce ambiguity about provenance and authorship.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Reviewers and editors<\/strong> should request raw data when results are surprising, use plagiarism and image-screening tools, verify reviewer identities where author-suggested reviewers are used, and apply reporting checklists or preregistration when applicable. Journals may adopt mandatory data-availability statements and standardized integrity checks.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Research offices and institutions<\/strong> should train early-career researchers in responsible conduct (data management, authorship norms, and transparent reporting) and create clear, accessible channels for raising concerns. Institutional oversight shortens detection timelines and reduces the burden on journals.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><!-- Checklist for submission-ready integrity Section --><\/p>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Checklist_for_submission-ready_integrity\"><\/span><strong>Checklist for submission-ready integrity<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>Run a reputable text-similarity check and resolve flagged passages.<\/li>\n<li>Deposit raw data and code, link them in the manuscript.<\/li>\n<li>Keep and upload original image files and annotate any processing.<\/li>\n<li>Use contributor-role statements (CRediT) and verify all authors approve submission.<\/li>\n<li>Consider independent editorial or manuscript review to identify weaknesses.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><!-- Conclusion and next steps Section --><\/p>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Conclusion_and_next_steps\"><\/span><strong>Conclusion and next steps<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>No single measure will eliminate scientific fraud, but evidence shows that a combination of transparent data practices, identity verification in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/peer-review-process\" data-internallinksmanager029f6b8e52c=\"26\" title=\"Peer Review\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">peer review<\/a>, routine use of plagiarism and image-forensics tools, and post-publication community scrutiny reduces the risk that serious misconduct goes unnoticed. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/peer-review-process\" data-internallinksmanager029f6b8e52c=\"26\" title=\"Peer Review\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Peer review<\/a> serves as an important filter, but its usual scope and resource constraints mean that certain frauds especially fabricated data, paper-mill outputs, and sophisticated falsifications are more likely to survive to publication. After publication, broader scrutiny and forensic tools increase the chance of detection, but the downstream costs (misleading citations, wasted resources, public harm) may already have accumulated.<\/p>\n<p>For authors concerned about strengthening manuscripts before submission, consider professional <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/manuscript-editing-services\" data-internallinksmanager029f6b8e52c=\"9\" title=\"Manuscript Editing\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">manuscript editing<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/premium-package\">submission support<\/a> that includes plagiarism screening and technical checks to reduce desk rejections and clarify data availability statements. For guidance on ethical AI use in manuscripts, explore the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/responsible-ai-movement\">Responsible AI Movement<\/a> hosted by Enago. For institutions and publishers, maintain the integrity of your publications with Enago\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/publication-support-services\/image-manipulation-detection\">image manipulation detection services<\/a>. Ensure compliance with publication standards by verifying the authenticity of research images for your institution or journal.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A growing number of retractions and high-profile exposures have focused attention on the many faces of scientific fraud and on the limits of peer review to catch them before publication. Understanding common fraud types, why some slip through review, and how detection differs before and after publication helps researchers, reviewers, and administrators design more effective [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":57948,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-57044","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-peer-review"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review - Enago Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Explore key types of scientific fraud, from fabrication to paper mills. Understand why peer review misses misconduct and how detection improves post-publication.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review - Enago Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Explore key types of scientific fraud, from fabrication to paper mills. Understand why peer review misses misconduct and how detection improves post-publication.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Enago Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-12-02T11:50:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-05-08T07:19:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Types-of-Fraud-Likely-to-Escape-Detection-During-Review.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1536\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"592\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Richard Murphy\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Richard Murphy\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review - Enago Articles","description":"Explore key types of scientific fraud, from fabrication to paper mills. Understand why peer review misses misconduct and how detection improves post-publication.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review - Enago Articles","og_description":"Explore key types of scientific fraud, from fabrication to paper mills. Understand why peer review misses misconduct and how detection improves post-publication.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/","og_site_name":"Enago Articles","article_published_time":"2025-12-02T11:50:39+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-05-08T07:19:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1536,"height":592,"url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Types-of-Fraud-Likely-to-Escape-Detection-During-Review.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"Richard Murphy","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Richard Murphy","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":["Article","BlogPosting"],"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/"},"author":{"name":"Richard Murphy","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#\/schema\/person\/60b60b5c7014833d3b277d396294cb8a"},"headline":"Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review","datePublished":"2025-12-02T11:50:39+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-08T07:19:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/"},"wordCount":1332,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Types-of-Fraud-Likely-to-Escape-Detection-During-Review.webp","articleSection":["Peer Review"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/","url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/","name":"Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review - Enago Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Types-of-Fraud-Likely-to-Escape-Detection-During-Review.webp","datePublished":"2025-12-02T11:50:39+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-08T07:19:15+00:00","description":"Explore key types of scientific fraud, from fabrication to paper mills. Understand why peer review misses misconduct and how detection improves post-publication.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Types-of-Fraud-Likely-to-Escape-Detection-During-Review.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Types-of-Fraud-Likely-to-Escape-Detection-During-Review.webp","width":1536,"height":592},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/types-of-fraud-likely-to-escape-detection-during-review\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Types of Fraud Likely to Escape Detection During Review"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/","name":"Articles","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Enago Articles","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#organization","name":"Enago Articles","url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/logo-enago-seo-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/logo-enago-seo-1.png","width":1200,"height":630,"caption":"Enago Articles"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/#\/schema\/person\/60b60b5c7014833d3b277d396294cb8a","name":"Richard Murphy","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/046a0ceeb5c38172654db93f9919593bc2e4e1391702eb8b7248865941ddbe18?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/046a0ceeb5c38172654db93f9919593bc2e4e1391702eb8b7248865941ddbe18?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/046a0ceeb5c38172654db93f9919593bc2e4e1391702eb8b7248865941ddbe18?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Richard Murphy"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/richard-murphy-32b994136?utm_source=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=member_ios"],"url":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/author\/richard-murphy\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57044","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=57044"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57044\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":57784,"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57044\/revisions\/57784"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/57948"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=57044"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=57044"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.enago.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=57044"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}