May 11, 2012

20 Things You Didn't Know About... Science 
Fraud - DISCOVER MAGAZINE

The geniuses who fudged data, the cheaters who did it in plain sight, and the frauds who got away with it
 by Eric A. Powell
1  What evil lurks in the hearts of scientists? Behavioral ecologist Daniele Fanelli knows. In a meta-analysis of 18 surveys of researchers, he found only 2 percent ’fessed up to falsifying or manipulating data...but 14 percent said they knew a colleague who had.
2  After studying retracted biology papers published between 2000 and 2010, neurobiologist R. Grant Steen claimed that Americans were significantly more prone to commit fraud than scientists from other nations.
But when two curious bloggers reanalyzed Steen’s data, they found that American’s aren’t so shifty after all.
 Chinese scientists were actually three times as likely as Americans to commit fraud. (French researchers were least likely to misbehave.)
5  If caught stealing someone else’s ideas, scientists have a handy defense: cryptomnesia, the idea that a person can experience a memory as a new, original thought.
6  But there’s no shortage of excuses. In the 1970s the FDA investigated Francois Savery, a doctor who submitted identical data to two drug companies, claiming that they were from two different studies. When confronted, he explained that he was forced to re-create his data sets because he took the original research with him on a lake picnic and lost it when his rowboat capsized.
7  Government authorities later learned that Savery never conducted the studies in the first place—or received a medical degree.
 Even geniuses succumb to temptation. Researchers have found that Isaac Newton fudged numbers in his Principia, generally considered the greatest physics text ever written.
9  Other legends who seem to have altered data: Freud, Darwin, and Pasteur.
10  And Austrian monk Gregor Mendel’s famous pea-breeding experiments—the foundation of modern ideas of heredity—are suspiciously good, matching his theory of genetic inheritance a little too well.
11  One of the most notorious scientific hoaxes remains unsolved. Someone mixed human and orangutan bones, treated them, and planted them to create Piltdown Man, a “missing link” between humans and apes found in 1912. But who?
12  Science historian Richard Milner accuses Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who also fabricated Sherlock Holmes. Doyle lived near the Piltdown site and resented the scientific community for mocking his belief in spiritualism. Opportunity and motive. Elementary!
13  In 1974 immunologist William Summerlin created a sensation when he claimed to have transplanted tissue from black to white mice. In reality, he used a black felt-tip pen to darken patches of fur on white mice.
14  Some researchers still use “painting the mice” to describe scientific fraud.
15  Painting the mice can have serious consequences. In the 1980s, psychologist Stephen Breuning published results from fictitious “trials” of tranquilizers; his findings informed the clinical practices for treating mentally retarded children.
16  Have you no subtlety, sir? In 1981 John Darsee, a rising-star cardiologist at Harvard, faked log entries in a canine heart study in full view of his colleagues.
17  Although many of his papers were later found to have false data, Darsee continued to be cited positively for years (pdf).
18  Write what you know: Harvard evolutionary psychologist Marc Hauser resigned last year after he was found guilty of eight counts of scientific misconduct. Now he’s working on a book, reportedly titled Evilicious: Explaining Our Evolved Taste for Being Bad.
19  The Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Research Integrity estimates there are 2,300 cases of misconduct among NIH-funded researchers each year.
20  A role-playing game on the office’s website, called “The Lab: Avoiding Research Misconduct,” has been downloaded 26,000 times since it launched last year. (Try testing your own moral compass here.)

No comments:

Random Posts


  • Letter to Editors

    From: "ODTU Rektor" To: jhep-eo@jhep.sissa.itSubject: Ethics CommitteeDate: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:22:46 +0200 Dear Editors,We are writing this message concerning a serious plagiarism case that we have come across with in a paper published by JHEP. First of all, we would like to express our disappointm... READ MORE>>

  • Experimenting with plagiarism detection on the arXiv:PHYSICS TODAY

    Toni Feder Starting this summer, submissions to the arXiv, the online server where many physicists check daily for new preprints, will be compared with the server's existing 400 000—and counting—manuscripts to check for plagiarism. When plagiarism is suspected, the submission will be flagged, and ... READ MORE>>

  • Plagiarism Detection in arXiv (2007)

    Sorokina Daria, Gehrke Johannes, Warner Simeon, Ginsparg Paul Abstract We describe a large-scale application of methods for finding plagiarism in research document collections. The methods are applied to a collection of 284,834 documents collected by arXiv.org over a 14 year period, covering a few... READ MORE>>

  • Will anything really change? Views from a journal editor

    Michael 2007;4:53–56The title of this conference is «Research misconduct: learning the lessons». However, the organizers seem to be somewhat confused, because the title of this last session today is: «Will anything really change?» If you really have learnt your lessons, then things will change. Howe... READ MORE>>

  • Plagiarists face clampdown : TIMES HIGHER EDUCATION

    Phil Baty More cases of academic fraud come to light as institutions embrace zero-tolerance culture, reports Phil Baty.>>> READ MORE>>

  • Trolling the arXiv for plagiarism

    John Timmer In a subscription-only report on an upcoming conference presentation, Nature spills the beans on what may be our best handle yet on plagiarism in the world of academic science. Most research into this area has been limited by the inaccessibility of many of the peer-reviewed journals, wh... READ MORE>>

  • Corruption and Fraud in Science

    Water, Air & Soil Pollution (2006) DOI 10.1007/s11270-006-9209-8 J. T. Trevors & M. H. Saier, Jr. Science is conducted by people, not all of whom are honest and credible, and some of whom unfortunately do not place the interests of humanity and our common biosphere ahead of their own self... READ MORE>>

.

.
.

Popular Posts