{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025331724969843185, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.484375, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Research Misconduct: Issues, Implications, and Strategies

Everyone who engages in research, whether original scientific investigations or scholarly studies, knows how easily error creeps into the process. It takes just a momentary diversion, a hidden bias, a casual acceptance of unsubstantiated claims, or a neglect of proper controls for entropy to take its toll. Disorder, not orderly truth, is the default state. Although it should not be surprising that errors enter the production of knowledge, it is generally accepted that science, as distinguished from other forms of fixing belief, is self-correcting. But how much of published scientific results needs to be corrected, what percentage of the erroneous results is intentional, and how effective is the scientific community in publicizing corrections to the literature?