News:

Welcome to the new (and now only) Fora!

Main Menu

Academic Fraud Clearinghouse

Started by spork, March 05, 2024, 02:36:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

bio-nonymous

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 13, 2024, 07:35:07 PM
QuoteEckert agreed to forgo contracting with the federal government or receiving government funding for eight years, longer than the three-year bans or supervision periods that ORI typically imposes. Eckert also agreed not to serve on any advisory or peer review committees for the U.S. Public Health Service, which includes the NIH, for eight years.

That'll show him.
Yeah, this whole "it is fine for academic researchers to steal millions from the taxpayers through organized crime (fraud, etc.), so we will just say they can't get any grants for a while and someone needs to keep an eye on their labs" is completely ridiculous. Defrauding a bank or embezzling millions from a company is a white collar crime that would/should get you a felony charge and prison time. Tax evasion for millions (ALSO AKA STEALING from the government) will get you prison time as well (see Wesley Snipes for an example). Why do scientists get a pass on prosecution almost always? Yes, there are a few serious charges here and there, but for the most part these criminals get slapped with a wet noodle. If you can't tell, it really ticks me off.

spork

Federal judge dismisses Francesca Gino's lawsuit against Data Colada scholars who exposed her fraud:

https://www.chronicle.com/article/she-sued-the-sleuths-who-found-fraud-in-her-data-a-judge-just-ruled-against-her.

I'm baffled that Dan Ariely still hasn't faced any consequences.
It's terrible writing, used to obfuscate the fact that the authors actually have nothing to say.

Hibush

Quote from: spork on September 12, 2024, 07:05:48 AMFederal judge dismisses Francesca Gino's lawsuit against Data Colada scholars who exposed her fraud:

https://www.chronicle.com/article/she-sued-the-sleuths-who-found-fraud-in-her-data-a-judge-just-ruled-against-her.

I'm baffled that Dan Ariely still hasn't faced any consequences.
Today's New Yorker article contextualizes her position in academe in a way that makes research fraud seem to have little real consequence.

"She was an ideal ambassador for the H.B.S. brand—confident, prolific, and sufficiently vague in her pronouncements that an executive could come away from one of her business-lite talks feeling affirmed in whatever previous beliefs he happened to entertain. Her extreme productivity, mostly untroubled by memorable ideas, was self-endorsing."