The pressure to rack up publications in high-impact journals could encourage misconduct, some say.

The latest in a string of high-profile academic fraud cases in China underscores the problems of an academic-evaluation system that places disproportionate emphasis on publications, critics say. Editors at the UK-based journal Acta Crystallographica Section E last month retracted 70 published crystal structures that they allege are fabrications by researchers at Jinggangshan University in Jiangxi province. Further retractions, the editors say, are likely.

日本共同社记者小泽一朗到北大进行突击采访。在南阁（国际合作部）门口，小泽一郎采访了一小个子男生（后证实该男生为国际关系学院学生纳海？）以下是现场原版真实问答记录：­

问:你支持抵制日货的这种观点或行动吗?­

答:每一个人都是一个个体，每个个体都是自由的。我无法左右别人的思想，也无权控制别人的行动。­

问：你如何定位中日关系？­

答：客观定位，平等互利关系。­

问：从学生的角度看，你认为两国关系中最大的障碍是什么？­

答：显然，日方在很多方面做出了错误的言论和举动，而这是我们不能接受和容忍的！一句话，改善中日关系需要日方正视历史，拿出善意和诚意。­

问：你个人使用日货吗？­

答：有，马桶。（在场学生大笑）­

看完后无地自容!

On Dec 19, 2009, editors at Acta Crystallographica Section Ealerted the scientific community to a disgraceful pattern of fraud involving papers they had published in 2007. At least 70 false crystal structures were reported—mainly from two groups led by Hua Zhong and Tao Liu, both at Jinggangshan University, Jian, China. All authors have now agreed to retraction of 41 papers published by Zhong and 29 by Liu. It is rather surprising that wrongdoing on such a scale evaded detection during peer review and, considering that crystal structures are deposited in public databases upon publication, that the truth has been uncovered so slowly.