Sting operations in biomedical publishing violate truthfulness and undermine trust in research.

Biomedical research cannot function without the trust of peers and society. The truthfulness of claims made by knowledge-producing agents, such as authors of research, is a prerequisite for their trustworthiness, and violations of truthfulness are rightly seen as a threat to the existence and validity of such research. While most reflection on the lack of truthfulness has focused on fake research, little attention has been paid to how sting operations and hoaxes arguably pose an equally great risk to the ethical integrity of publishing. This paper posits that sting operations, like fake research, are examples of breaches of truthfulness. We also argue that for both fake research, as well as stings and hoaxes, the lack of respect for the ethical criterion of truthfulness makes those researchers who engage in them untrustworthy. Sting operations are akin to fighting fire with fire, further undermining trust in biomedical research. From a deontological perspective, we also argue that the reliance on anonymity in sting operations makes them just as bad, if not worse, than fake research. We advocate for critical scholarship as an alternative to hoaxes and sting operations to expose fake research, in order to promote truthfulness rather than violate it. Finally, we argue that journalists reporting on sting operations should insist less on their entertainment and sensationalist value, and focus more on their unethical nature.