Academic Fraud Clearinghouse

[bio-nonymous]

Eckert 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.

[Hibush]

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.

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."

[Puget]

This looks very, very bad: https://www.science.org/content/article/research-misconduct-finding-neuroscientist-eliezer-masliah-papers-under-suspicion

When someone doing research like Gino's commits fraud, the worst that happens is some companies do dumb things that don't work. This is way worse.

When someone doing research leading directly to drug development commits fraud, people in clinical trials are harmed. When top NIH leaders commit fraud, it undermines confidence in the NIH and the whole science enterprise. This is both. 

[fizzycist]

This looks very, very bad: https://www.science.org/content/article/research-misconduct-finding-neuroscientist-eliezer-masliah-papers-under-suspicion

When someone doing research like Gino's commits fraud, the worst that happens is some companies do dumb things that don't work. This is way worse.

When someone doing research leading directly to drug development commits fraud, people in clinical trials are harmed. When top NIH leaders commit fraud, it undermines confidence in the NIH and the whole science enterprise. This is both. 

Wow, I'm not sure if I ever heard of a case so high profile and so egregious. Over 100 manipulated papers by the Director of a >$1B division (neuroscience) within NIA. Holy crap!

There is something very fucked up about the state of Alzheimers/Parkinson's research.

[Puget]

This looks very, very bad: https://www.science.org/content/article/research-misconduct-finding-neuroscientist-eliezer-masliah-papers-under-suspicion

When someone doing research like Gino's commits fraud, the worst that happens is some companies do dumb things that don't work. This is way worse.

When someone doing research leading directly to drug development commits fraud, people in clinical trials are harmed. When top NIH leaders commit fraud, it undermines confidence in the NIH and the whole science enterprise. This is both. 

Wow, I'm not sure if I ever heard of a case so high profile and so egregious. Over 100 manipulated papers by the Director of a >$1B division (neuroscience) within NIA. Holy crap!

There is something very fucked up about the state of Alzheimers/Parkinson's research.

Yeah, this is at least the third major academic fraud case in Alzheimers research within the last couple years (it it's not even my area, so I'm sure I've missed some). I guess the incentives are very high ($$$$) compared to less well funded fields, but really depressing that this keeps happening and setting back real research that could potentially make a real difference.

[spork]

The Epistemic Bankruptcy of Academia

The essay takes a while to get going.

[spork]

The journal Optical and Quantum Electronics is now averaging over 100 retractions per month, because its editorial board published articles produced by paper mills and used fake peer reviews:

https://retractionwatch.com/2024/10/15/springer-nature-journal-has-retracted-over-200-papers-since-september/.

[apl68]

And Springer is supposed to be one of the world's leading publishers of scientific journals, too!  This could really damage research and reputations in some fields. 

Paper mills really stink, whether they're the academic kind or the more literal kind I spent many years living near.  And the former seems to do a lot more damage to the surrounding environment.