“Loki”, in the comments;

This is a classic example of cargo cult science where, a researcher notes that the more papers a person has, the higher their standing in the local scientific hierarchy. Thus, instead of doing research which would result in a few truly profound discoveries in a handful of papers, he instead decides that the more papers he publishes the greater his standing will be. He notes that papers have a certain structure, contain graphs and figures and he spends his time generating detailed figures and graphs just like the Pacific Islanders craeated fake airports after WWII. Someone like him should never work in research again and should be tarred and feathered before being run out of his lab. In todays publish or perish research environment, Einstein would be considered a liability given his very low scientific productivity as judged by the number of papers he published.
In medicine, fraud in research if far easier to commit as complexity of meatware is far greater than what one is working with in solid state physics. Also, doctors in many cases appear incapable of being objective and the easiest way one can get threatened as a medical student is to point out glaring holes in a physicians research project. In the world of academic research (or at least when I was a researcher) such criticisms are welcome as it saves one going down the wrong path whereas in medicine such comments lead to threats about ones future. Considering that medicine considers consensus more important than scientific rigor, it’s no surprise that one has the worst scientific frauds being committed in this field.

Hope for Liberals: Rats can feel regret, says scientist.

In the year 2001,

…Schön published a paper in a peer reviewed journal at a rate of one every eight days, with many reaching the empyrean heights of Nature, Science, and Physical Review. Other labs were in awe of his results, and puzzled because every attempt they made to replicate his experiments failed, often in ways which seemed to indicate the descriptions of experiments he published were insufficient for others to replicate them. Theorists also raised their eyebrows at Schön’s results, because he claimed breakdown properties of sputtered aluminium oxide insulating layers far beyond measured experimental results, and behaviour of charge transport in his organic substrates which didn’t make any sense according to the known properties of such materials.
The experimenters were in a tizzy, trying to figure out why they couldn’t replicate Schön’s results, while the theorists were filling blackboards trying to understand how his incongruous results could possibly make sense. His superiors were basking in the reflected glory of his ascendence into the élite of experimental physicists and the reflection of his glory upon their laboratory.