However, at least a few more requirements, next to care, and the previously mentioned objectivity, have to be mentioned, such as experimental skills, knowledge of previously obtained scientific results, writing and speaking in clear language

Already Multatuli (1) noted as a major obstacle the incompetence of researchers and this still is the major source of unintentional deceit.

Next it should be mentioned that to become a really successful scientist, GSP does not suffice. Also creativity comes into the picture. In a rather daring paper, Woodward and Goodman (5) even stated that rules for GSP not always go hand in hand with creativity. E.g., referring to the well known scientist Medawar (7) they stated that “the typical scientific paper misrepresents the actual sequence of events involved in the conduct of an experiment, the process of reasoning by which the experimenter reaches various conclusions and so on. In general, experimentalists will make it look as if they had a much clearer idea of the ultimate result than was actually the case. Misunderstandings, blind alleys and mistakes of various sorts will fail to appear in the final written account”.

If we come to consider the personality of the successful scientist, in relationship to what is being considered GSP with respect to his leadership of, and the social professional control in, a group, his social abilities may hamper optimal performance. J.P. Ruston et al (8) quoting also Drevdahl & Cattell (9):

“The impression that emerges of the successful research scientist is that of a person considerably less sociable than average, rather seriously-minded, intelligent, aggressive, dominant, achievement-oriented, and independent. In addition, he or she is cognitively complex, has a radical imagination and a well-articulated self-concept. In short, the creative person is both introvert and bold”.

Here we quote these observations, certainly not to play down the importance of keeping to GSP, but to demonstrate that 'there is more between heaven an earth one can dream of' when alleged misconduct is being judged. Even if we would agree completely on written rules, there will be pitfalls to apply those unconditioned, if dishonesty and the intent to deceive are improvable.

–> 1.6 Motivation, Satisfaction and Frustration in Science