Peer review is pretty ineffective at catching errors. In one study of peer review, reviewers caught ~ 30% of deliberately inserted errors that were specificall

Peer review is pretty ineffective at catching errors. In one study of peer review, reviewers caught ~ 30% of deliberately inserted errors that were specifically chosen to be detectable in review [0]. Fraud is noticed by the broader research community (assuming it's noticed at all) when it continues for years over multiple manuscripts. You make a good point about colleagues in the same lab noticing unethical behavior. A shared research culture that values integrity and transparency is a good defense against malpractice and fraud. Building up and maintaining that culture—and the methodological skills to back it up—is a continual challenge. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2586872/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2586872/