[W:542] Star Harvard business professor stripped of tenure, fired for manipulating data in studies on dishonesty

[Chomsky]

Yes, it did. But it never would have happened if there was such complacency with poor peer review then as there is today.

To attack the general process though, you'd have to show this is a predominate problem.

 

[TamleeB]

No, you even suck at trolling.

Trolling? I have been involved in this thread from early on. It’s all good. Once again….another bump for NOLA. Good job.

 

[Napoleon]

To attack the general process though, you'd have to show this is a predominate problem.

I posted a segment earlier about at least ~28% of published biomedical research being fraudulent. I should think the predominance of the problem to be obvious. First we have the malicious actors running pay-to-publish journals to allow academics to bypass peer review completely. Then we have academics cumulatively producing hundreds of thousands of papers every year to meet tenure publication requirements, often by using AI or paper mills, which cannot possibly all be reviewed before publication. The process is collapsing under the weight of it.

People have been sounding the alarm on this for years. I’ve lost track of how many times people have managed to get obviously fake papers published to demonstrate that no one is even reading let alone reviewing papers before publishing them.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

To attack the general process though, you'd have to show this is a predominate problem.

No they don't, they have been taking single point data and extrapolating it out. I have no idea why you are arguing within rationality with MAGA. It is pointless. They keep making one false assertion after another on a never ending avoidance of fact and reason. Every single thread.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Can you offer your specific opinion on this thread? Harvard and Francesca?

My opinion is "and"?
She f___ed up, she got booted for it.
These things will happen when one is caught falsifying data.
Are you attempting to make a point other than that?

 

[TamleeB]

My opinion is "and"?
She f___ed up, she got booted for it.
These things will happen when one is caught falsifying data.
Are you attempting to make a point other than that?

Nope. I am totally fine with my point.

 

[TamleeB]

No they don't, they have been taking single point data and extrapolating it out. I have no idea why you are arguing within rationality with MAGA. It is pointless. They keep making one false assertion after another on a never ending avoidance of fact and reason. Every single thread.

WTF are you talking about? Anywho…..thanks again for bumping NOLAs thread.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

Nope. I am totally fine with my point.

As long as you're giddy, I'm happy.

 

[Chomsky]

I posted a segment earlier about at least ~28% of published biomedical research being fraudulent. I should think the predominance of the problem to be obvious. First we have the malicious actors running pay-to-publish journals to allow academics to bypass peer review completely. Then we have academics cumulatively producing hundreds of thousands of papers every year to meet tenure publication requirements, often by using AI or paper mills, which cannot possibly all be reviewed before publication. The process is collapsing under the weight of it.

People have been sounding the alarm on this for years. I’ve lost track of how many times people have managed to get obviously fake papers published to demonstrate that no one is even reading let alone reviewing papers before publishing them.

If 28% is a credible claim, then yeah there may be problems. But I haven't seen the claim or other consistent supporting claims, to evaluate. Nor have I seen that claim specifically applied to Harvard.

So I guess what I'm asking is,

"Where's the proof, and what's the point?"

 

[TamleeB]

As long as you're giddy, I'm happy.

“Giddy”? No need! I do believe that this is showing exactly the issues with many of our higher education institutions. And personally, yes I am glad we are finally seeing it come to light. I am sorry if you struggle with that.

 

[Chomsky]

No they don't, they have been taking single point data and extrapolating it out. I have no idea why you are arguing within rationality with MAGA. It is pointless. They keep making one false assertion after another on a never ending avoidance of fact and reason. Every single thread.

There also doesn't seem to any reference as to why I should be concerned or have interest in this?

I can't say I woke up this morning, and wondered if there's an "honesty advantage" in signing a document at the top - rather than at the bottom!

 

[TamleeB]

There also doesn't seem to any reference as to why I should be concerned or have interest in this?

I can't say I woke up this morning, and wondered if there's an "honesty advantage" in signing a document at the top - rather than at the bottom!

I am not surprised. Anyways…..it appears she finally is a goner. Thankfully.

 

[Napoleon]

If 28% is a credible claim, then yeah there may be problems. But I haven't seen the claim or other consistent supporting claims, to evaluate. Nor have I seen that claim specifically applied to Harvard.

So I guess what I'm asking is,

"Where's the proof, and what's the point?"

The point is the process has been extensively tested and found wanting. The point is that a study is no longer deserving of belief merely for having been published for that reason. How much more proof do you need? Do you need more than the skyrocketing rate of retractions?

More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 — a new record

The number of articles being retracted rose sharply this year. Integrity experts say that this is only the tip of the iceberg.

www.nature.com

 

[Chomsky]

WTF are you talking about? Anywho…..thanks again for bumping NOLAs thread.

It wouldn't hurt though, if there was some type of point made as to what this means to us, and why we should care?

Don'tcha' think?

Then, maybe there'd be something worthwhile to debate - besides the intricacies of "peer review".

 

[Gimmesometruth]

There also doesn't seem to any reference as to why I should be concerned or have interest in this?

Thats what I'm asking, why are you expecting rationality from MAGA?

I can't say I woke up this morning, and wondered if there's an "honesty advantage" in signing a document at the top - rather than at the bottom!

I woke up this morning wondering how much this country is going to hell, I pop in to see if the cause has gotten worse, I see threads like this where again MAGA is doing the usual divorced from reality hypocritical announcements, and I see it is getting worse.

The MAGA side just keeps posting these crazy threads, and they can't discuss any basic ideas within the event and they act as if it is emblematic. I say it is just another assault on rationality in a time of lies on a grand scale. You and I have spoken on this, this level of insanity is unprecedented in our history.

 

[Bodi]

A renowned Harvard University professor was stripped of her tenure and fired after an investigation found she fabricated data on multiple studies focused on dishonesty.

Francesca Gino, a celebrated behavioral scientist at Harvard Business School, was let go after the school’s top governing board determined she tweaked observations in four studies so that their findings boosted her hypotheses, GHB reported.

Harvard administrators notified business faculty that Gino was out of a job in a closed-door meeting this past week, the outlet reported.

Star Harvard business professor stripped of tenure, fired for manipulating data in studies on dishonesty

A renowned Harvard University professor was stripped of her tenure and fired after an investigation found she allegedly manipulated data to support multiple studies she conducted.

nypost.com

We are supposed to trust the "experts" right? It reminded me of this:

She looks Italian... I wonder if she is a legal immigrant?


.

 

[Bighorn66]

LOL. She cheated on dishonesty studies. LOL

I think the whole thing lends credibility to the fact that she really is an expert on dishonesty. .

 

[Bighorn66]

So who should we trust? Pedophile priests? Pedophile billionaires? Who?

The priests you are referencing were not pedophiles. They were homosexuals.

 

[Bighorn66]

That's like saying because one surgeon mistreated his patients we shouldn't trust any surgeons.

It’s not just one. There is a significant amount of fraud and incompetence in the behavioral sciences.

 

[ataraxia]

Pointing to some other group, over there who wasn't skeptical because you don't want it applied to something you hold dear is .......a deflection.

It should apply to everyone.

What do you think I hold dear? Gina Francesco? Or science?

 

[ataraxia]

Yes, it did. But it never would have happened if there was such complacency with poor peer review then as there is today.

Evidence that peer review today is any worse than before? Gina Francesco?

 

[Ikari]

What I'd like to know is, "Why?".

Not sure, it seemed like she was tenured at that point, but these sorts of things have happened before. It could be tied with competition to get grants or funding, if she had more publications that were higher profile, she might have thought she would have a better chance at getting more funding. In grad school, we were always told the story of Schön who worked back in the days of Bell Labs and faked data. You see it pop up from time to time, a lot of it (at least in physics) tends to be found out quickly because the research is either in a developing field or others try to reproduce the work.

 

[ncguy]

The priests you are referencing were not pedophiles. They were homosexuals.

Pedophilia
Pedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.

 

[ataraxia]

What does that have to do with this thread??? Threadjacking much?

You were talking about how it's important to be super skeptical of the latest science. I was just showing you the consequences. Those people, like you, all thought they were just being so smart and seeing through the corruption and conspiracies.

 

[Bighorn66]

You don't recognize Trump in that statement?

Despite Warning Labels, Trump’s Election Misinformation Tweets Spread Widely Across Social Media Platforms, New Study Finds​

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2021/august/despite-warning-labels--trump-s-election-misinformation-tweets-s.html

You’re trying to conflate academic research with propaganda. You can do better.