# data[].attributes.body
Funding is an important part of the publishing process. You need money for people and chemicals and other stuff. If the lab is low on funding the propability of them doing ethical research diminishes.

# data[].attributes.body
To put in the raw data could be a distraction and the researches could focus on a minor mistake that is not that important. It could shift the discussion to a unnimportant issue.

# data[].attributes.body
Some papers put the statistical test (e.g. t-test) to see if the data is reliable and supports the claim. Some papers don´t publish this important information. All papers should do that.

# data[].attributes.body
Some publisher publish your article for a fee. This allows things to be published that have not been verified through the usual scientific process.

# data[].attributes.body
Them allowing researchers to publish, no matter if they are first or second in the same research topic.

# data[].attributes.body
Raw data should be accessible to the publisher

# data[].attributes.body
It summarizes articles and websites into 5 bulletpoints so you don't need to read whole papers.

# data[].attributes.body
It is a website where you can upload the URL or DOI and get the whole paper as a PDF.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Open access: The true cost of science publishing | Nature
2. The challenges for scientific publishing, 60 years on - Hausmann - 2016 - Journal of Neurochemistry - Wiley Online Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Open access: The true cost of science publishing - Nature

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nature - Cheap open-access journals raise questions about the value publishers add for their money.

# data[].attributes.body
The incredible high pressure of being the first to publish a specific research topic added with with the limited time which is available could lead to experiencing difficulties with keeping a healthy and good mindset. Furthermore the creation of a competent research group is inevitable, else the pressure of finishing on time is high.

# data[].attributes.body
The number of papers that have to be reviewed are increasing year after year. For each researcher the evaluation of the papers in combination with their own research leads to a massive workload, which can be difficult to manage.

# data[].attributes.body
There are two definitions to whistleblowers. Ones who notice ethical breaches during the research and find it of the utmost importance to notify journal editors, in order to discover fraud and those who try to harm the reputation of a specific scientist by releasing information, which in hindsight might turn out to be untrue.

# data[].attributes.body
After concluding the research and finishing the paper, performing a plagiarism scan is expected. The risk of having a high percentage of plagiarism, purposefully or not, would lead to additional stress, considering that the paper must still be published at the predefined date but has yet to be thoroughly re-edited.

# data[].attributes.body
Science looses its worth when researchers try to publish fake or optimized data, just to gain acknowledgements. Not only is it wrong but could also be potentially dangerous if fake data for pharmaceutical products is published as it could potentially lead to health hazards.

# data[].attributes.body
Nowadays when it comes to defining the authors of a specific paper, all authors contributing to the final version are mentioned. In some countries the order of the authors is important. For example in the Netherlands it is common practice to name the PI last and also name the LAB technician that contributed to the project. In other countries that is not the case.

# data[].attributes.body
To publish papers, funding must be secured first.
Science should be free for everyone. After publishing a paper it is ethically questionable, why other scientists should pay to view those published papers.