|
The Scientist: NewsBlog:
Harvard prof falsified sleep data
Posted by Elie Dolgin [Entry posted at 9th April 2009 04:26 PM GMT]
Rate this article
This is POOR Reporting/Terrible Article by C M [Comment posted 2009-04-21 15:50:39] There is absolutely no reporting on why this researcher conducted such a terrible act, the motivation etc.
In addition, it seems if you a liar about your data, you can end up with a cushy job at Merck. Nice incentive. Raw data? Sure, anytime. by anonymous poster [Comment posted 2009-04-14 04:08:44] Anonymous previous poster... In my field of research anyone can request raw data from a published author with no particular need stated or implications and the penalty for not producing it is ostracism from the field by all competent parties - forever. Maybe the standards in these troubled fields of study is too much slippage in standards among the practitioners and their scientific societies. If he had published data, this would have never hapenned by anonymous poster [Comment posted 2009-04-13 22:14:45] This is exactly the kind of thing that should prompt readers to ask authors to publish their data alongside the manuscript. We are a company that are trying to push that agenda to the forefront of the academic community. Follow us on orwik.blogspot.com He will be punished less by anonymous poster [Comment posted 2009-04-11 12:05:11] Why? Because he's white and whites still get more benefits of doubt and lighter punishments in America for the same misdeeds, especially if they are educated professionals. Lovely. by Sergio Vasquez [Comment posted 2009-04-10 23:14:55] This story sounds as if he was trying to beat an accuser to the punch.
And his post-confession statement is vulgar. Unreported repercussions include professional distrust, unfavorable tenure review, and a bad reputation with future grads and post-docs. If nothing punitive occurs, I can name many who have done worse. Unsuccessful grant competitors should want to have a moment of the good professor's time. Rewards and Responsibilities by Phil Davis [Comment posted 2009-04-10 12:47:48] Publication comes with both rewards *and* responsibilities. When the rewards are so great in academia (grants and resources, promotion and tenure), and oversight is based on the honor system, it is not surprising that fraud doesn't happen more often.
I'm not trying to defend Fogel here. I'm saying that the system we've created to reward academics may lead some good scientists to make bad decisions. Saving Science by anonymous poster [Comment posted 2009-04-10 01:24:28] As with anyone who purposely falsifies data, this man's career as a scientist should be OVER! We have all read so many of these fudged data news stories, and in most cases, the person at blame is back working at some university or lab- What?! Come on! Who in their right-mind would hire someone after having been publicly (or privately) confirmed of making up data!? If we, true scientists, want science to continue, we must make the punishment for this crime severe; it should be under no circumstances acceptable or forgivable. He says "I never really thought through the consequences..." (speaks volumes of the quality of researcher able to make it to harvard) and "if I hadn't come clean, this probably never would have come to light," as this is something commendable! What a joke! Disturbing Quote by ANTONY JEEVARAJAN [Comment posted 2009-04-09 15:44:47] I understand the fact that "to err is human", but I am disturbed to hear from Dr. Fogel that "I hate to say it, but this probably happens more often than we think.". The feedback coming from a researcher from a reputable institution is indicating a systemic fault. As a scientific community, what can we do to alleviate this problem? You can do it, trust me. by George Reclos [Comment posted 2009-04-09 15:14:54] I have published some articles and reviewed some. I can tell you that if someone is determined to falsify the results he can do it. I have come across a couple of papers that smelled nastily (and very rightly so as it was proved later) but I can't guarantee the results of the others. How can anybody do that? If you see a figure in the report all you can do is check the consistency or perhaps do some calculations yourself. However, the author has probably made them before you. Just my 2 cents. The review process should be even more rigorous by Jian Liu [Comment posted 2009-04-09 12:48:14] As a bench-work scientist, actually I myself am very much concerned about the published research results. We can often find some funny mistakes (more than typos) in published papers. They look like just a copy-and-paste. If researchers don't check their published data carefully and write their manuscripts carefully, how could we trust their results? On the other hand, I think those reviewers should take part of the responsibilities. It's their job to scrutinise the work even more rigidly. You cannot just read the introduction and discussion. You should also go through the "material and methods" and "results" section carefully. False Data Hurts All Scienctists by MICHAEL ALTMANN [Comment posted 2009-04-09 12:24:24] Without knowing all the facts, such as who funded the study, etc., I can't imagine what would prompt a respected researcher to intentionally falsify data. This is a sad day for science and it hurts public confidence in our work. I'm gratified, however, that he has publically admitted his mistake and takes responsibility for it. Comment on this blog |