The scientific community is an international body of professionals who ultimately work collaboratively to further advance scientific discovery and application. It is because of this global network of interactions that occur between these scientists that individuals must make every effort possible to ensure the integrity of their research conducted and ultimately published. China, due to the enormous number of individuals within the scientific workforce, possesses a significant degree of influence and responsibility when it comes to the scientific material it publishes for use by a global audience. It is because of this responsibility that officials in China's scientific community are making every effort to both address the growing concern of violations within scientific research and to educate people to prevent potential incidents in the future. An example of this collective effort is demonstrated in the article “Research Integrity in China” published by President Wei Yang of the National Natural Science Foundation of China. President Yang not only identifies the ongoing problem of ethical misconduct within China's scientific community, but also presents the collective efforts both domestically and abroad that have been created to address and correct such discrepancies. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The opening of Yang's piece focuses on the need to protect the integrity of research conducted based on the implications that may arise if it is not done. Scientific research is no longer just a measure of an individual scientist's success; it is also a reflection of their nation's intelligence in a global position. The relative ease of publishing and obtaining information from virtually anywhere in the world has enabled the explosive expansion of the scientific community to unprecedented levels. It is because of this increase in communication around the world that Yang highlights the growing concern about lapses in research integrity within Chinese academics. It presents the problem that when such immoral issues become public knowledge, they rarely remain localized at the national level for long. When such news becomes known, Yang emphasizes that such controversies may detract from other contributions that the Chinese scientific community could make. Such an event is unlikely to be unique to a single country. It is my belief that any event where the integrity of the research is lacking would certainly represent a burden to the nation of origin. Perhaps the greatest consequence of such actions would be the association of that nation's scientific community with a lack of integrity, even though it may be a single group of individuals. Yang presents the fact that while traits that contribute to discrepancies in scientific research integrity may contribute to an “unhealthy research environment,” efforts are actively made to correct and prevent such problems from occurring in the future (Yang, 1019). . Interestingly, most, if not all, of these efforts are similar to those of other scientific communities around the world. Such resolutions include imposing limits on the number of submissions of the same article to different journals, increasing the length of the review process to catch errors (or fraud) before public publication, and more (Yang, 1019). These efforts further demonstrate that such issues are not isolated within a single nation but also within the global scientific community. Using international means tomonitor the integrity of the scientific community's research, Yang further demonstrates the interconnectedness and interdependence necessary for China's success both domestically and abroad. Ensuring research integrity within the scientific community is not the responsibility of a single nation. Just as fraud and errors occur in research conducted around the world, it is the responsibility of all members of the scientific community to ensure that the integrity of the research conducted is guaranteed. President Wei Yang's article on the need for more active efforts in China is but one example of a growing trend. This is perhaps best exemplified when Yang states that credible science cannot “happen until the scientific enterprise is sound and credible” (Yang, 1019). For science to progress at the quality and pace required, individuals working in the field must ensure that the integrity of their research is ethical, credible and sustainable. The Publications Bazaar in China As the most direct form of interaction and use of scientific research occurs through the use of publications, there have been observations within the community that show a shift from an academic culture to a more business model. China appears to be one such epicenter of this business where scientists purchase a line of authorship within a paper that has yet to be published (Hvistendahl, 1035). The most direct comparison I could make for this practice would be to a company that purchases advertising space for self-promotion. In both forms they lack taste and further demean their respective communities as a whole. One of the most critical issues that arise with the continued use of this practice is that it is becoming a relatively easy commodity due to the speed and ease of communication via the Internet. In this way, scientific articles are treated as a commodity that can be purchased as easily as any other consumer product. This trend is of considerable concern in China and is best described in Mara Hvistendahl's article “China's Publication Bazaar” which highlights how this practice can continue and the need for it to be prevented by the scientific community. Trading and selling authorship of scientific articles becomes a significant issue as it completely demoralizes the overall theme of science: the pursuit and application of original thought. When scientists deliberately decide to use their research solely as a means of income and recognition, the entire scientific process becomes tainted by corruption, dishonesty, and possibly meaningless research. Hvistendahl best demonstrates this demoralization of scientific thinking when one of these authorship societies stated that “'some authors don't have much use for their papers after they are published and they can be passed on to you'” (Hvistendahl, 1035). This statement demonstrates how such publication exchanges of authorship degrade the research being conducted. I believe that scientists should be proud of the research they carry out and not view it as a means to get a higher salary or promotion. Ownership of research is a key factor within the scientific community, and practices like this do nothing but do a disservice to those attempting to present credible (and ethical) research. While the practice of authorship trade is not likely to be isolated exclusively within a single nation or academic cultural group, I believe that nations such as China are more prone to its occurrence due to significant pressures to have publications such as.