Last Updated on September 25, 2025 by Karl Thompson
In your study of Is Sociology a Science?, one of the key debates is whether scientific knowledge can truly be seen as reliable and objective. Traditionally, science has been respected for its rigorous methods—observation, measurement, replication, and peer review—which are designed to minimise bias. However, recent evidence shows that science itself is facing a credibility crisis. Fraudulent and poor-quality research is now so widespread that it threatens to undermine the very reliability of knowledge.
The Scale of the Problem
Scientific fraud is no longer rare. In fact, 2023 saw a record number of more than 10,000 scientific papers retracted worldwide, according to Nature (2023). Many of these were retracted due to fabricated data, manipulated images, or fake peer review systems. This level of misconduct is not just an embarrassment—it risks poisoning entire fields of research when false results are published and cited by others.
One of the main drivers of this problem is the rise of so-called “paper mills”—companies that sell fake or low-quality research articles to academics under pressure to publish. A PNAS study in 2025 found that suspected paper-mill outputs are doubling every 1.5 years, much faster than legitimate scientific publications (Anderson et al., 2025). This suggests that fraud in science is expanding at an industrial scale.
“Publish or Perish” Pressures
The phrase publish or perish describes the pressure on academics to produce large numbers of publications in order to gain jobs, promotions, and research funding. Career advancement is often linked more to the quantity of research than to its quality.
This incentive structure has created fertile ground for dishonesty. Paper mills exploit this by offering authorship slots for sale, recycling old articles, or fabricating results. Journals with weaker editorial controls—often newer or less established ones—become easy targets. While publishers are now using detection tools such as image-forensics and AI-based text analysis, fake papers still escape peer review too easily. Once published, they can be cited by other researchers, spreading misinformation and wasting time and resources.
This echoes wider sociological debates about how institutions and their rules shape behaviour, sometimes encouraging conformity and sometimes creating deviance.
Case Studies and Research Evidence
The scale of the problem is clear from several recent investigations:
- A study of the journal Bioengineered found that 25.7% of its 878 articles (2021–2022) were problematic due to manipulated images, duplication, or links to retracted papers (Haley et al., 2025).
- Between 2019 and 2021, analysis suggested that anywhere from 2% to 46% of manuscripts submitted to journals may have originated from paper mills (Else & Van Noorden, 2021).
- Fraudulent papers have appeared in both “predatory” journals and in reputable titles, showing that no part of the system is immune.
Why This Matters for Sociology
For A-level students asking whether sociology is a science, this debate is crucial. If natural sciences themselves are vulnerable to fraud, then claims that sociology is “less scientific” because it lacks certainty must be reconsidered.
- Methodological implications: If fabricated data enters the scientific record, the reliability of quantitative methods is undermined.
- Peer review credibility: When fake studies bypass peer review, it raises questions about how any discipline—including sociology—validates its knowledge.
- Sociological analysis: Fraud in science illustrates how deviance emerges not just from “bad individuals” but from structural pressures—a theme central to sociological thinking.
Deviance, Institutions, and Norms
From a sociological perspective, the crisis in scientific publishing demonstrates how deviance operates within professional institutions:
- Systemic deviance: It is not just a case of “bad apples” but a sign of structural problems in academia—pressures, incentives, and norms that reward quantity over quality.
- Norm erosion: When academics see others rewarded for unethical practices, deviant behaviour risks becoming normalised.
- Institutional trust: Science depends on public trust. If fraud continues to spread, the legitimacy of the scientific enterprise itself could be undermined.
What Can Be Done?
Reforms are being discussed to protect scientific integrity, including:
- Changing incentives – universities and funders could reward replication studies, data sharing, and methodological transparency rather than just publication counts.
- Improved detection – AI tools for detecting image manipulation and “tortured phrases” are being developed (Byrne et al., 2023).
- Post-publication peer review – platforms like PubPeer and Retraction Watch help flag problems even after publication.
- Ethics education – researchers must be trained to recognise the wider social impacts of fraudulent knowledge.
Final Thoughts
The rise of paper mills and fraudulent science highlights that scientific knowledge is not automatically objective or reliable simply because it is labelled “peer-reviewed.” Instead, science—like sociology—is shaped by social structures, incentives, and human behaviour.
For students of sociology, this reinforces the importance of thinking critically about knowledge claims. If the natural sciences face a crisis of reliability, it challenges simple assumptions that sociology is “less scientific.” Both disciplines must work to maintain integrity and trust.
Unless governments, journals, and universities reform incentives and strengthen integrity systems, the risk is that bad science becomes the new normal—with dangerous consequences for medicine, policy, and public trust in knowledge itself.
References
- Anderson, J., Ross-Hellauer, T., & Oransky, I. (2025). The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(9).
- Else, H., & Van Noorden, R. (2021). The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science. Nature.
- Byrne, J. A., et al. (2023). Detecting paper mill activity: image and text forensics in scientific publishing. Research Integrity and Peer Review.
Signposting
To find out how this material fits into wider sociological theories please see my main sociological theories overview.
Alt Text for Image:
“Infographic highlighting the crisis of fraudulent research: record retractions, publish-or-perish pressures, deviance in professional institutions, and potential solutions.”