To me it's quite simple: * If there's no clear way to get the raw-data * If it's unclear how the data was gathered -> the results are most likely fab

To me it's quite simple: * If there's no clear way to get the raw-data * If it's unclear how the data was gathered -> the results are most likely fabricated One strange psychological effect I've seen is that especially in medicine some people themselves spend a lot of time rigging data to get to their PhD, but in the end they absolutely trust in anything published in the field. "The science nowadays is so good - medical scandals today are completely impossible"