I don't think that there is necessarily a distinction here between orthodox and unorthodox sciences. The article is, in short, about scientists that fudge their data. I would have to agree that this behaviour is probably market driven. They have funding that they have to "earn" and this funding can be pulled dependent on results (success or failure). If they want to keep their funding but their project isn't going well, I wouldn't be surprised if they did fudge their data to make it look better. Whether they are just doing this to keep the money flow coming in or if they do this to be permitted to continue their research so that they can find better results is pure speculation. So yes, market driven but who is to say what the intent is. One can be misguided and have good intentions but still performing in the same manner than another who is doing it purely for the money.

Stephanie

In every man there is something wherein I may learn of him, and in that I am his pupil.--Ralph Waldo Emerson