Close

Complete Captcha

• 2 years - 168 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 652 Goods vs 310 No Goods

1. Economist
   bad2
   

   The stronger the competition - the stronger the incentives to betray. (at least positive correlation)

   If you already achieved civil servant status ("Beamtenstatus") you cannot be fired. So there is an incentive to do everything to become a civil servant. If you intervene at early stages of your career , you put your career at risk. So incentive is clearly in favor of letting this happen and publish your paper in a top5. This will increase your chances of being promoted to civil servant.

   Conclusion: Incentives need to be changed

   2 years ago # QUOTE 3 Volod 0 Vlad !

2. Economist
   9ddb
   

   How solid is the evidence? Are the fabrications possible to trace back to a single individual? I'd want to ensure beyond any reasonable doubt that your supervisor is in fact guilty of scientific misconduct. If possibly, make backup copies. Take photos. Ask trusted colleagues to confirm your findings. Make sure every precaution is taken before you make your move, so that the people responsible cannot plausibly be cleared of blame and of responsibility for scientific misconduct. Then talk to every sensible actor you can think of. Consider talking to the media. If you are right about this, you will win.

   3rd year PhD student here. One of the undergrad RAs employed by my supervisor has repeatedly made me aware of peculiar errors in raw data files and code compiled by my supervisor when putting together a massive dataset. This dataset is central to a top 5 submission (current status R&R) co-authored by my supervisor, a last-year PhD student and 2 HRMs. I myself co-author a paper with my supervisor using variables from the dataset for central analyses. I couldn’t let it go and just had to take a deeper look into some of the underlying files and code. First I didn’t want to believe it, but the truth is that thanks to this RA I ended up discovering indisputable evidence of research fraud. Examples include replacing scans of authentic historical documents with fabricated ones before extracting/converting to text/data, generating 500 completely made up observations to make multiple main results stronger, using a figure in the appendix that relies on a fake regressor variable generated by a few lines of code in a dofile, and excluding multiple estimates that do not support the main conclusions of the paper.
   What should I do? I honestly don’t know what to do. Who do I talk to?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 6 Volod 0 Vlad !

3. Economist
   ece0
   

   Just to back this comment up, make darn sure of everything

   How solid is the evidence? Are the fabrications possible to trace back to a single individual? I'd want to ensure beyond any reasonable doubt that your supervisor is in fact guilty of scientific misconduct. If possibly, make backup copies. Take photos. Ask trusted colleagues to confirm your findings. Make sure every precaution is taken before you make your move, so that the people responsible cannot plausibly be cleared of blame and of responsibility for scientific misconduct. Then talk to every sensible actor you can think of. Consider talking to the media. If you are right about this, you will win.

   3rd year PhD student here. One of the undergrad RAs employed by my supervisor has repeatedly made me aware of peculiar errors in raw data files and code compiled by my supervisor when putting together a massive dataset. This dataset is central to a top 5 submission (current status R&R) co-authored by my supervisor, a last-year PhD student and 2 HRMs. I myself co-author a paper with my supervisor using variables from the dataset for central analyses. I couldn’t let it go and just had to take a deeper look into some of the underlying files and code. First I didn’t want to believe it, but the truth is that thanks to this RA I ended up discovering indisputable evidence of research fraud. Examples include replacing scans of authentic historical documents with fabricated ones before extracting/converting to text/data, generating 500 completely made up observations to make multiple main results stronger, using a figure in the appendix that relies on a fake regressor variable generated by a few lines of code in a dofile, and excluding multiple estimates that do not support the main conclusions of the paper.
   What should I do? I honestly don’t know what to do. Who do I talk to?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 0 Vlad !

4. Economist
   3af5
   

   Just to add to these comments: Carry a gun, in case your supervisor decides to kill you.

   Just to back this comment up, make darn sure of everything

   How solid is the evidence? Are the fabrications possible to trace back to a single individual? I'd want to ensure beyond any reasonable doubt that your supervisor is in fact guilty of scientific misconduct. If possibly, make backup copies. Take photos. Ask trusted colleagues to confirm your findings. Make sure every precaution is taken before you make your move, so that the people responsible cannot plausibly be cleared of blame and of responsibility for scientific misconduct. Then talk to every sensible actor you can think of. Consider talking to the media. If you are right about this, you will win.

   3rd year PhD student here. One of the undergrad RAs employed by my supervisor has repeatedly made me aware of peculiar errors in raw data files and code compiled by my supervisor when putting together a massive dataset. This dataset is central to a top 5 submission (current status R&R) co-authored by my supervisor, a last-year PhD student and 2 HRMs. I myself co-author a paper with my supervisor using variables from the dataset for central analyses. I couldn’t let it go and just had to take a deeper look into some of the underlying files and code. First I didn’t want to believe it, but the truth is that thanks to this RA I ended up discovering indisputable evidence of research fraud. Examples include replacing scans of authentic historical documents with fabricated ones before extracting/converting to text/data, generating 500 completely made up observations to make multiple main results stronger, using a figure in the appendix that relies on a fake regressor variable generated by a few lines of code in a dofile, and excluding multiple estimates that do not support the main conclusions of the paper.
   What should I do? I honestly don’t know what to do. Who do I talk to?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 3 Vlad !

5. Economist
   baa6
   

   To be honest... you won't win.

   You may be able to do what's right (to be clear: if your allegations are true, then reporting them is obviously the right thing to do), but it is highly probable to come at a high cost to you personally if the report has your name on it or is traceable to you.

   It would be great to have enough faith in the department, school and profession to think this bad behavior would be punished, but it won't be.

   The department will stand by its faculty member, the school will protect its reputation and stand by the faculty member, etc. (Comparison: ask anyone you know who has ever made some kind of harassment complaint to HR in the private sector what happened to the offender.)

   If I were you: gather the evidence and make sure it's very, very good, (i.e., beyond any possibility of a "oh wow how terrible but I blame that fabrication on an RA") but I would only take it to anyone AFTER graduation w/ a job in hand, preferably in the private sector.

   I don't think you're wrong - it sounds like you're on the right side. But it would be naive and unrealistic for you to expect that people will just take your side and punish the offending professor.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 4 Vlad !

6. Economist
   d14d
   

   To be honest... you won't win.
   You may be able to do what's right (to be clear: if your allegations are true, then reporting them is obviously the right thing to do), but it is highly probable to come at a high cost to you personally if the report has your name on it or is traceable to you.
   It would be great to have enough faith in the department, school and profession to think this bad behavior would be punished, but it won't be.
   The department will stand by its faculty member, the school will protect its reputation and stand by the faculty member, etc. (Comparison: ask anyone you know who has ever made some kind of harassment complaint to HR in the private sector what happened to the offender.)
   If I were you: gather the evidence and make sure it's very, very good, (i.e., beyond any possibility of a "oh wow how terrible but I blame that fabrication on an RA") but I would only take it to anyone AFTER graduation w/ a job in hand, preferably in the private sector.
   I don't think you're wrong - it sounds like you're on the right side. But it would be naive and unrealistic for you to expect that people will just take your side and punish the offending professor.

   The sad truth. Its hard to ask anyone to sacrifice themselves for the greater good.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

7. Economist
   b2df
   

   is it so hopeless? what happened with Brian Wansink?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

8. Economist
   625a
   

   is it so hopeless? what happened with Brian Wansink?

   IMO, it's very hard to get admin to care about misconduct in working papers. Don't be surprised if their reaction is "It isn't published, and it can still change, so who cares? You're the bad guy for even bringing this up."

   But with Wansink, all of the issues Nick Brown et al. uncovered were in published papers, and over a dozen of them were retracted. With that kind of bad press, it'd take severe corruption for the college/university to look the other way. Ironically Wansink was at Cornell, home to big daddy Andrew Karolyi...

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

9. Economist
   8fe7
   

   I'd say it depends on the strength of the evidence, the culture in the country and at the workplace, and how many external actors are willing to get involved. If the evidence is ''very, very good'', even the most corrupt departments usually have to do something eventually, in particular if the media starts spreading the word. Remeber the Macchiarini scandal? It's an interesting case, and it admittedly partly provides support for your pessimistic view that whistleblowers pay a price. But it also provides strong support for the idea that even in highly hierarchical and corrupt systems, you can bring justice to people in power who commit fraud, also in the short run.

   To be honest... you won't win.
   You may be able to do what's right (to be clear: if your allegations are true, then reporting them is obviously the right thing to do), but it is highly probable to come at a high cost to you personally if the report has your name on it or is traceable to you.
   It would be great to have enough faith in the department, school and profession to think this bad behavior would be punished, but it won't be.
   The department will stand by its faculty member, the school will protect its reputation and stand by the faculty member, etc. (Comparison: ask anyone you know who has ever made some kind of harassment complaint to HR in the private sector what happened to the offender.)
   If I were you: gather the evidence and make sure it's very, very good, (i.e., beyond any possibility of a "oh wow how terrible but I blame that fabrication on an RA") but I would only take it to anyone AFTER graduation w/ a job in hand, preferably in the private sector.
   I don't think you're wrong - it sounds like you're on the right side. But it would be naive and unrealistic for you to expect that people will just take your side and punish the offending professor.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 0 Vlad !

10. Economist
    dbd3
    

    still an uphill battle

    I'd say it depends on the strength of the evidence, the culture in the country and at the workplace, and how many external actors are willing to get involved. If the evidence is ''very, very good'', even the most corrupt departments usually have to do something eventually, in particular if the media starts spreading the word. Remeber the Macchiarini scandal? It's an interesting case, and it admittedly partly provides support for your pessimistic view that whistleblowers pay a price. But it also provides strong support for the idea that even in highly hierarchical and corrupt systems, you can bring justice to people in power who commit fraud, also in the short run.

    To be honest... you won't win.
    You may be able to do what's right (to be clear: if your allegations are true, then reporting them is obviously the right thing to do), but it is highly probable to come at a high cost to you personally if the report has your name on it or is traceable to you.
    It would be great to have enough faith in the department, school and profession to think this bad behavior would be punished, but it won't be.
    The department will stand by its faculty member, the school will protect its reputation and stand by the faculty member, etc. (Comparison: ask anyone you know who has ever made some kind of harassment complaint to HR in the private sector what happened to the offender.)
    If I were you: gather the evidence and make sure it's very, very good, (i.e., beyond any possibility of a "oh wow how terrible but I blame that fabrication on an RA") but I would only take it to anyone AFTER graduation w/ a job in hand, preferably in the private sector.
    I don't think you're wrong - it sounds like you're on the right side. But it would be naive and unrealistic for you to expect that people will just take your side and punish the offending professor.
    

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

11. Economist
    9ddb
    

    So what did you decide in the end?

    3rd year PhD student here. One of the undergrad RAs employed by my supervisor has repeatedly made me aware of peculiar errors in raw data files and code compiled by my supervisor when putting together a massive dataset. This dataset is central to a top 5 submission (current status R&R) co-authored by my supervisor, a last-year PhD student and 2 HRMs. I myself co-author a paper with my supervisor using variables from the dataset for central analyses. I couldn’t let it go and just had to take a deeper look into some of the underlying files and code. First I didn’t want to believe it, but the truth is that thanks to this RA I ended up discovering indisputable evidence of research fraud. Examples include replacing scans of authentic historical documents with fabricated ones before extracting/converting to text/data, generating 500 completely made up observations to make multiple main results stronger, using a figure in the appendix that relies on a fake regressor variable generated by a few lines of code in a dofile, and excluding multiple estimates that do not support the main conclusions of the paper.
    What should I do? I honestly don’t know what to do. Who do I talk to?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 0 Vlad !

12. Economist
    9703
    

    ^ Yeah, any updates?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

13. Economist
    dbd3
    

    Wild guess: Nothing was done

    ^ Yeah, any updates?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

14. Economist
    dbd3
    

    Why not just send an anonymous comment to the referees?

    Wild guess: Nothing was done

    ^ Yeah, any updates?
    

    2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 0 Vlad !

15. Economist
    dbd3
    

    THIS

    Why not just send an anonymous comment to the referees?

    Wild guess: Nothing was done

    ^ Yeah, any updates?
    

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

16. Economist
    2da2
    

    You don’t ”THIS” you own posts, man.

    I do, however, subscribe to your view that an anonymous comment would be in order.

    THIS

    Why not just send an anonymous comment to the referees?

    Wild guess: Nothing was done

    ^ Yeah, any updates?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

17. Economist
    bcc3
    

    I'd recommend not to do anything. It never ends well for whistle-blowers. Can you name me one whistle-blower who is living a comfy life and has a good career? Exactly, there aren't any.

    Blowing the whistle alienates the people you blow the whistle on and sends a loud and clear signal that you're trouble to all future employers. Nobody is looking for someone to challenge them and keep them honest. What they're looking first and foremost is a team player and a team player doesn't betray the team. You either voice your concerns to the team leader and you do so quietly and politely or you leave, but you never speak out in public against the team.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 2 Vlad !

18. Economist
    5c65
    

    I'd recommend not to do anything. It never ends well for whistle-blowers. Can you name me one whistle-blower who is living a comfy life and has a good career? Exactly, there aren't any.
    Blowing the whistle alienates the people you blow the whistle on and sends a loud and clear signal that you're trouble to all future employers. Nobody is looking for someone to challenge them and keep them honest. What they're looking first and foremost is a team player and a team player doesn't betray the team. You either voice your concerns to the team leader and you do so quietly and politely or you leave, but you never speak out in public against the team.

    This is how it is done. Make sure that the paper does not see the light of day, by asking a few annoying questions internally, but don't make a big scandal out of it.

    Yes, you will be celebrated by the open science ppl but at the end of the day nobody likes a snitch.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

19. Economist
    ed97
    

    Many people, and whole schools, will immediately drop you from consideration if they even smell a hint of a R at.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

20. Economist
    585b
    

    Are you serious? If everyone throughout history would’ve reasoned like you do in this post, we’d probably still be sitting in some tent somewhere trying to treat lethal diseases with magic.

    It often ends well in the long run for many of those whistle-blowers and dissidents who are successful. But even when it doesn’t end well, these people are often the ones who change history for the better. People like you rarely do.

    I'd recommend not to do anything. It never ends well for whistle-blowers. Can you name me one whistle-blower who is living a comfy life and has a good career? Exactly, there aren't any.
    Blowing the whistle alienates the people you blow the whistle on and sends a loud and clear signal that you're trouble to all future employers. Nobody is looking for someone to challenge them and keep them honest. What they're looking first and foremost is a team player and a team player doesn't betray the team. You either voice your concerns to the team leader and you do so quietly and politely or you leave, but you never speak out in public against the team.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 0 Vlad !

Reply »