Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 1297–1313 | Cite as

Science as a Matter of Honour: How Accused Scientists Deal with Scientific Fraud in Japan

  • Pablo A. PellegriniEmail author
Original Paper


Practices related to research misconduct seem to have been multiplied in recent years. Many cases of scientific fraud have been exposed publicly, and journals and academic institutions have deployed different measures worldwide in this regard. However, the influence of specific social and cultural environments on scientific fraud may vary from society to society. This article analyzes how scientists in Japan deal with accusations of scientific fraud. For such a purpose, a series of scientific fraud cases that took place in Japan has been reconstructed through diverse sources. Thus, by analyzing those cases, the social basis of scientific fraud and the most relevant aspects of Japanese cultural values and traditions, as well as the concept of honour which is deeply involved in the way Japanese scientists react when they are accused of and publicly exposed in scientific fraud situations is examined.


Scientific fraud Honour Japan Research misconduct 


  1. Anderson, M. S., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2007). The perverse effects of competition on scientists’ work and relationships. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(4), 437–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benedict, R. (2005 [1946]). The chrysanthemum and the sword: Patterns of Japanese culture. New York: Mariner Book.Google Scholar
  3. Bloor, D. (1976). Knowledge and social imagery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  4. Boiger, M., Güngör, D., Karasawa, M., & Mesquita, B. (2014). Defending honour, keeping face: Interpersonal affordances of anger and shame in Turkey and Japan. Cognition and Emotion, 28(7), 1255–1269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P. (1976). Le champ scientifique. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 2(2–3), 88–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ceccherini-Nelli, A., & Priebe, S. (2011). Economic factors and suicide rates: Associations over time in four countries. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 46(10), 975–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Classen, T. J., & Dunn, R. A. (2012). The effect of job loss and unemployment duration on suicide risk in the United States: A new look using mass-layoffs and unemployment duration. Health Economics, 21(3), 338–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Claxton, L. D. (2005). Scientific authorship: Part 1. A window into scientific fraud? Mutation Research/Reviews Mutation Research, 589(1), 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Collins, H. (2008). The meaning of hoaxes. In M. Mazzotti (Ed.), Knowledge as social order: Rethinking the sociology of Barry Barnes (pp. 77–82). London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  10. Connor, S. (2014). Japanese stem cell scientist Yoshiki Sasai found dead in apparent suicide. The Independent, 5 August 2014.Google Scholar
  11. Cossins, D. (2012). A decade of misconduct. The Scientist, 27 November 2012. Accessed 15 May 2017.
  12. Daily Sabah. (2015). Japanese engineer commits suicide due to fault on Izmit Gulf Bridge. Daily Sabah, Istanbul, 23 March 2015. Accessed 23 November 2016.
  13. De Vos, G. A. (2004 [1963]). Deviancy and social change: A psychocultural evaluation of trends in Japanese delinquency and suicide. In R. K. Beardsley & R. J. Smith (Ed.), Japanese culture: Its development and characteristics (pp. 153–171). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Demetriou, D. (2016). ‘Death from overworking’ claims hit record high in Japan. The Telegraph, 4 April 2016.Google Scholar
  15. Di Marco, F. (2016). Suicide in twentieth-century Japan. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Durkheim, É. (2002 [1897]). Suicide: A study in sociology. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fanelli, D. (2013). Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good sign. PLoS Med, 10(12), e1001563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fanelli, D., Costas, R., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2017). Meta-assessment of bias in science. PNAS, 114, 3714–3719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fuyuno, I., & Cyranoski, D. (2006). Mystery surrounds lab death. Nature, 443(21), 253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gallagher, J. (2014). Stem cell scandal scientist Haruko Obokata resigns. BBC News, 19 December 2014.Google Scholar
  22. Goldberg, D. S. (2006). Reacting to research fraud fails to address underlying incentives to commit fraud. Accessed 15 December 2016.
  23. Harker, D. (2015). Creating scientific controversies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Helm, L., & Eisenstodt, G. (1996). Caught in cross-fire of pacific apple war. Los Angeles Times, 22 July 1996.Google Scholar
  25. Hong, S. (2008). The Hwang Scandal that “shook the world of science”. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, 2, 1–7.Google Scholar
  26. Iga, M. (1981). Suicide of Japanese youth. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 11(1), 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ikegami, E. (2003). Shame and the samurai: Institutions, trusthworthiness, and autonomy in the elite honor culture. Social Research, 70(4), 1351–1378.Google Scholar
  28. Japan Watching. (2010). Suicide in Japan. Japan Watching, 27 February 2010. Accessed 27 January 2017.
  29. Johnston, G. (2016). Shinichi Fujimura. Archaeology expert, 25 June 2016. Accessed 12 May 2017.
  30. Judson, H. F. (2004). The great betrayal: Fraud in science. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.Google Scholar
  31. Kantha, S. S. (2015). Suicides of 84 newsworthy Japanese between 1912 and 2015. International Medical Journal, 22(5), 352–357.Google Scholar
  32. Konno, D., Kasukawa, T., Hashimoto, K., Itoh, T., Suetsugu, T., Miura, I., et al. (2015). STAP cells are derived from ES cells. Nature, 525(7570), E4–E5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Leung, A. K.-Y., & Cohen, D. (2011). Within- and between-culture variation: Individual differences and the cultural logics of honor, face, and dignity cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 507–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leung, M., & Sharma, Y. (2014). Education minister resigns over research fraud scandal. University World News, Issue 329, 14 July 2014. Accessed 7 December 2016.
  36. Liao, Q.-J., Zhang, Y.-Y., Fan, Y.-C., Zheng, M.-H., Bai, Y., Eslick, G. D., et al. (2017). Perceptions of Chinese biomedical researchers towards academic misconduct: A comparison between 2015 and 2010. Science and Engineering Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9913-3.Google Scholar
  37. Lu, S. (2015). The mystery behind Japan’s high suicide rates among kids. Wilson Quarterly, 22 October 2015.Google Scholar
  38. Martin, A. (2016). Obokata, author of retracted stem-cell papers, tells her side in book. The Wall Street Journal, 28 January 2016.Google Scholar
  39. Martin, B. (1992). Scientific fraud and the power structure of science. Prometheus, 10(1), 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Marx, K. (1999 [1846]). Marx on suicide. Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Maslog, C. (2014). Asia-Pacific analysis: Addressing science fraud in Asia. SciDevNet, 17 November 2014. Accessed 2 November 2016.
  42. Matthews, D. (2015). East Asia has ‘toxic academic culture’. Times higher education, 7 September 2015. Accessed 28 October 2016.
  43. Merton, R. K. (1957). Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 635–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Normile, D. (2000). Archaeologist faked important discovery. Science, 7 November 2000. Accessed 17 November 2016.
  46. Normile, D. (2001). Were artifacts planted at Japanese site? Science, 21 November 2001. Accessed 14 November 2016.
  47. Normile, D. (2012). A new record for retractions? (Part 2). Science, 2 July 2012. Accessed 15 May 2017.
  48. OECD. (2014). Suicide. In Society at a glance 2014: OECD social indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/soc_glance-2014-en.
  49. Pickett, J. T., & Roche, S. P. (2017). Questionable, objectionable or criminal? Public opinion on data fraud and selective reporting in science. Science and Engineering Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9886-2.Google Scholar
  50. Pinguet, M. (1984). La mort volontaire au Japon. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  51. PLE Disease Ecology. (2015). Tanii Akio and the fire blight: A tragedy at the confluence of science and international trade. Blog of the University of Pittsburgh Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology, 11 July 2015. Accessed 19 December 2016.
  52. Rasko, J., & Power, C. (2015). What pushes scientists to lie? The disturbing but familiar story of Haruko Obokata. The Guardian, 18 February 2015.Google Scholar
  53. Scientific Ethics and Research Conduct Committee. (2006). Report on the two papers suspected of involving scientific misconduct. Scientific Ethics and Research Conduct Committee at the Graduate School of Frontier Biosciences, Osaka University, publicly released on September 22, 2006. English translation of Summary, Conclusion, and selected Addenda. Accessed 6 December 2016.
  54. Stapel, D. (2014). Faking science: A true story of academic fraud (Nicholas J. L. Brown, Trans.). Accessed 2 November 2016.
  55. Steen, R. G. (2011). Retractions in the scientific literature: Do authors deliberately commit research fraud? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(2), 113–117.Google Scholar
  56. Sutherland, S. (1992). Irrationality: The enemy within. London: Constable.Google Scholar
  57. Sutton, M. Q. (2013). Archaeology: The science of the human past. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Tan, R. (2014). Fighting back against research fraud. Asian Scientist Magazine, 8 August 2014. Accessed 28 October 2016.
  59. The Economist. (2013). Trouble at the lab. The Economist, 19 October 2013. Accessed 18 November 2016.
  60. Tsurimoto, T., Itoh, T., Katayama, T., Kimura, H., & Shinohara, A. (2009). Report from the working group of the molecular biology society of Japan for the investigation of fraud in research papers. Genes to Cells, 14(8), 903–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Van Noorden, R. (2010). US scientists “more prone” to fake research? No. Nature News Blog, 16 November 2010. Accessed 26 October 2016.
  62. Wagner, D. (2012). Researcher, peer review thyself. The wire, news from the Atlantic, 24 August 2012. Accessed 16 November 2016.
  63. Weinstein, D. (1979). Fraud in science. Social Science Quarterly, 59(4), 639–652.Google Scholar
  64. West, M. D. (2006). Secrets, sex, and spectacle: The rules of scandal in Japan and the United States. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wolfe, A. S. (1990). Suicidal narrative in modern Japan: The case of Dazai Osamu. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zaraspe, R. S. (1970). Chikamatsu Monzaemon: A study in Japanese tragedy. Asian Studies, 8(3), 352–366.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CONICET, Universidad Nacional de QuilmesInstituto de Estudios sobre la Ciencia y la TecnologíaBernalArgentina

Personalised recommendations