Twitter drama: fake persona, covid, and #metoo

[onthefringe]

Today there are numerous additional stories in various media, including the NYT. The times article includes statement from McLaughlin acknowledging she made up @Sciencing_bi. What a horrific mess.

[ab_grp]

I hadn't seen the NYT article and was glad it provided a term for this: "Munchausen by internet."  I had been thinking along those lines but didn't realize that there was a specific term in place.  I'm actually surprised McLaughlin owned up to this so soon, although I think most would have done so sooner.

[Puget]

NYT link: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/04/style/college-coronavirus-hoax.html

She says she's realized she needs mental health help, but given that this was a long-running and self-serving fraud and  it sounds like there may also be significant financial fraud as well (no one knows where the gofundme money went), and less inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt on that. She also took careful steps to make it harder to discover the fraud. That all sounds more like con artist than mentally ill behavior (though of course it could be both).

I'm struck with similarities to people who have been caught blatantly fabricating large amounts of research data. The perpetrators act with great cunning to maintain the fraud, materially benefit from it, and then, when caught, plead mental illness e.g., this is an interesting read on an infamous case:
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html

[ab_grp]

I'm struck with similarities to people who have been caught blatantly fabricating large amounts of research data. The perpetrators act with great cunning to maintain the fraud, materially benefit from it, and then, when caught, plead mental illness e.g., this is an interesting read on an infamous case:
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html

That is definitely a very interesting case.  The linked article provides a lot of detail and summarizes the evolution of events well, but I'd also highly recommend reading his book to get further insight from his perspective.  As noted, it has been translated and provided as a free PDF.  Here's a link to that: https://errorstatistics.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/fakingscience-20141214.pdf  I found it completely enthralling to follow the story of how things went so bad.  I also wonder how many researchers were negatively impacted by his fake data and guidance on what to study.

I also find it interesting wording given the particulars that she apologizes "without reservation" for what she's done.

[writingprof]

I also find it interesting wording given the particulars that she apologizes "without reservation" for what she's done.

Is that a Native American joke?  Talk about misreading your audience.

Also, the subhed on the Times's homepage is currently "A professor at Arizona State University does not exist."  I'm not sure that's quite right.

[jimbogumbo]

I also find it interesting wording given the particulars that she apologizes "without reservation" for what she's done.

Is that a Native American joke?  Talk about misreading your audience.

Also, the subhed on the Times's homepage is currently "A professor at Arizona State University does not exist."  I'm not sure that's quite right.

Heh. They may be making a global statement.

[bacardiandlime]

I'm struck with similarities to people who have been caught blatantly fabricating large amounts of research data. The perpetrators act with great cunning to maintain the fraud, materially benefit from it, and then, when caught, plead mental illness e.g., this is an interesting read on an infamous case:
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html

What ever happened to our favorite research scammer (on the CHE fora), Mike LaCour?

[Puget]

I'm struck with similarities to people who have been caught blatantly fabricating large amounts of research data. The perpetrators act with great cunning to maintain the fraud, materially benefit from it, and then, when caught, plead mental illness e.g., this is an interesting read on an infamous case:
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html

That is definitely a very interesting case.  The linked article provides a lot of detail and summarizes the evolution of events well, but I'd also highly recommend reading his book to get further insight from his perspective.  As noted, it has been translated and provided as a free PDF.  Here's a link to that: https://errorstatistics.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/fakingscience-20141214.pdf  I found it completely enthralling to follow the story of how things went so bad.  I also wonder how many researchers were negatively impacted by his fake data and guidance on what to study.

I also find it interesting wording given the particulars that she apologizes "without reservation" for what she's done.

I forgot he wrote a book-- I can't say I'm all that interested in reading it since I hardly think he's a reliable narrator. He certainly ruined the careers of all of his grad students, who by all accounts were only guilty of a fair degree of failing to question well outside of field norm practices (usually, the grad students are the ones collected the data, not the PI). There was also considerable repetitional damage to the field.

What ever happened to our favorite research scammer (on the CHE fora), Mike LaCour?

Good question-- last I heard he had lost his job. I assume he is working far outside the field. Hard to believe anyone would trust him with anything data related ever again. That was a somewhat different case in that he was a grad student and it was, as far as we know, his first crime. Of course if he had gotten away with it it seems likely it wouldn't have been his last. Good story here on how he got caught by two other grad students looking to replicate his methods, and how they went on to do the study right: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-two-grad-students-uncovered-michael-lacour-fraud-and-a-way-to-change-opinions-on-transgender-rights/

[bacardiandlime]

Good question-- last I heard he had lost his job. I assume he is working far outside the field. Hard to believe anyone would trust him with anything data related ever again. That was a somewhat different case in that he was a grad student and it was, as far as we know, his first crime.

Well, at the time he was busted he'd done more than one thing wrong (faking the study, lying on his cv, claiming awards he didn't have etc). I don't believe people start doing that kind of thing at 28. I bet he'd been faking stuff all the way along (in his applications to college, grad school, etc).

[Puget]

Good question-- last I heard he had lost his job. I assume he is working far outside the field. Hard to believe anyone would trust him with anything data related ever again. That was a somewhat different case in that he was a grad student and it was, as far as we know, his first crime.

Well, at the time he was busted he'd done more than one thing wrong (faking the study, lying on his cv, claiming awards he didn't have etc). I don't believe people start doing that kind of thing at 28. I bet he'd been faking stuff all the way along (in his applications to college, grad school, etc).

Yes, fair enough, I just meant in terms of faking data, but that was likely just lack of prior opportunity if earlier projects had been more supervised by others. I agree usually people work their way up to big lies from small ones. Which, to bring it back around to the original topic, raises the question of what else McLaughlin has lied about in the past. It already sounds like the tenure denial may have also involved creating fake supporters on social media, but how much further back does it go, and was her research involved as well? It's looking like this is someone who we should be glad to have well out of science.

[marshwiggle]

Which, to bring it back around to the original topic, raises the question of what else McLaughlin has lied about in the past. It already sounds like the tenure denial may have also involved creating fake supporters on social media, but how much further back does it go, and was her research involved as well? It's looking like this is someone who we should be glad to have well out of science.

She has totally destroyed the point of her #metooSTEM venture, since she herself is the poster child for why people's claims cannot be taken at face value.

[bacardiandlime]

She has totally destroyed the point of her #metooSTEM venture, since she herself is the poster child for why people's claims cannot be taken at face value.

Exactly. And this was why the whole "believe all women" thing was going to turn ugly. Of course there are bad faith actors and nut jobs who are also women.
There are also paranoid grievance mongers with delusions of persecution ("nefarious forces ruining my career" is a narrative I've heard from academics of both sexes). For some of these people #metoo is just another way to say the world is out to get them (and get some online sympathy if they play it right).

[writingprof]

This thread. This story. Good grief. I'm just going to assume henceforth that all accusations of bias are made up unless I saw it with my own eyes.

[polly_mer]

I still wonder how people could have been taken in.  The anthropology department at ASU is only 30 people.  While faculty photos may not be conclusive for an ethnic or gender identity, the department is just not that big in terms of circumstantial evidence for observed interests and writing style.

[ab_grp]

I still wonder how people could have been taken in.  The anthropology department at ASU is only 30 people.  While faculty photos may not be conclusive for an ethnic or gender identity, the department is just not that big in terms of circumstantial evidence for observed interests and writing style.

I think the point was made in one of the Twitter threads that anthro teaches in several different departments, so it may not specifically have been the anthro department.  But, a lot of people seemed to blindly accept that this person was real.  There are a lot of marginalized (and non) individuals who use pseudonymous accounts, but I think (or at least hope) this might make individuals question some of what they read.  It's tough, because I was going to say especially if it seems controversial, but I guess there are plenty of real life people who use those accounts to post things they can't post under their own names, especially if they are marginalized, ECR, etc.

As for whether Stapel is a reliable narrator (sorry I can't seem to include that quote as well right now), I don't think he painted himself in a sympathetic light, let alone a favorable one.  His book really is an interesting read about his downward spiral.  My own opinion, of course.  He definitely did damage to the field and to individuals he mentored.