 This sort of tension over the benefits and detriments of credit practices also plays out with respect to debates about scientific fraud. Starting with Merton many have argued that the desire to claim priority, and thus credit, drives  fraud.[5]  These arguments seem to suggest that scientists who ignore credit, and instead attempt to yield truth will do a better job. Bright (2017a), though, uses a model to point out that credit-seekers who fear retaliation may publish more accurate results than truth-seekers who are convinced of some fact, despite their experimental results to the contrary. In other words, a true believer may be just as incentivized to commit fraud as someone who simply seeks approval from their community.