Abstract:Background: Today, scientists and academic researchers experience an enormous pressure to publish innovative and ground-breaking results in prestigious journals. This pressure may blight the general view concept of how scientific research needs to be done in terms of the general rules of transparency; duplication of data, and co-authorship rights might be compromised. As such, misconduct acts may occur more frequently than foreseen, as frequently these experiences are not openly shared or discussed among researchers. Main body: While there are some concerns about the health and the transparency implications of such normalised pressure practices imposed on researchers in scientific research, there is a general acceptance that researchers must take and accept it in order to survive in the competitive world of science. This is even more the case for junior and mid-senior researchers who have recently started their adventure into the universe of independent researchers. Only the slightest fraction manages to endure, after many years of furious and cruel rivalry, to obtain a long-term, and even less probable, permanent position. There is an evil circle; excellent records of good publications are needed in order to obtain research funding, but how to produce pioneering research during these first years without funding? Many may argue this is a necessary process to ensure good quality scientific investigation, possibly, but perseverance and resilience may not be the only values needed when rejection is received consecutively for years. Conclusion: There is a general culture that scientists rarely share previous bad experiences, in particular if they were associated to misconduct, as they may not be seen or considered as a relevant or hot topic to the scientific community readers. On next, a recent misconduct experience is shared, and a few additional reflections and suggestions on this topic were drafted in the hope other researchers might be spared unnecessary and unpleasant times.

A CITY IN THE HILL OR A DUNGEON IN THE VALLEY: WHERE ARE WE HEADING WITH OUR PRESENT PUBLICATION CULTURE

The Shackles of Peer Review: Unveiling the Flaws in the Ivory Tower

Plea to publish less

On Good and Bad Intentions behind Anomalous Citation Patterns among Journals in Computer Sciences

In which wretched part of the world? A glimpse into western drug- and device-makers (and others) behaving badly

The Impact of Social Media and Post-Truth in Building Public Opinion Regarding Government Policies: A Model Study Based on the Views of Current Students and Alumni of Rammohan College

Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding 'Publications in India': A cross-sectional study

The perilous path: reimagining promotion and tenure in African academia

Unearthing slow violence in the Anthropocene: A study of myth and ethics in Amitav Ghosh's Jungle Nama

Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability

Are we not Reinventing the Wheel?: Reviewing Literature in Social Science Scholarship and the Imperatives of Aligning with Global Best Practices

Towards a Democratic University: A call for Reflexive Evaluation and a Participative Culture

Popular news in the 21st century Time for a new critical approach?

"Research paper mills": A factory outlet for dubious research

Publication ethics: Role and responsibility of authors

Publish or Perish mantra in the medical field: A systematic review of the reasons, consequences and remedies

Constructive and obsessive criticism in science

Deceiving scientific research, misconduct events are possibly a more common practice than foreseen

Editorial Essay: Why Do We Still Have Journals?

Authorship in biomedical research: A sweet fruit of inspiration or a bitter fruit of trade

The Paradox of Industrial Involvement in Engineering Higher Education