Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Research. Show all posts

Monday, March 7, 2011

Former MIT Researcher Convicted of Fraud

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/03/former-mit-researcher-convicted-.html#sci-comments

on 4 March 2011, 5:03 PM

The ordeal isn't over for biologist Luk van Parijs, who was fired by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 2005 after admitting to fabricating research data. Yesterday, Van Parijs, 40, pleaded guilty in a U.S. District Court in Boston to one count of making a false statement on a federal grant application.

Van Parijs worked in the field of RNA interference. MIT launched an investigation after his students and postdocs raised questions about his research and found that he had fabricated and falsified data in grant applications, submitted manuscripts, and a published paper. In 2009, the federal Office of Research Integrity found that he had also falsified data in other publications.

The U.S. attorney's office in Boston announced yesterday that Van Parijs will be sentenced 14 June and that he could receive up to 5 years in prison and up to a $250,000 fine. The government alleges that he falsely claimed to have developed a specific transgenic mouse and to have obtained certain results from an experiment. According to a plea agreement, the U.S. attorney will not recommend a fine, but Van Parijs has agreed to pay MIT $61,117 in restitution.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Scientific misconduct

http://blogs.sciencemag.org/sciencecareers/2011/02/more-on-culture.html

February 22, 2011

More on Culture and Misconduct

Some months back, Science Careers looked into research exploring the relationship between academic misconduct and social structure. Studies by Andrew Schrank of the University of New Mexico and Cheol-Sung Lee of the University of Chicago had identified structural features of universities in some East Asian countries that they say contribute to higher rates of dishonesty in research.

Now an article in the journal Human Organization amplifies the discussion. "Stereotypes of Asian students as being more prone to plagiarize are frequently found in the literature," write Daniel E. Martin and Asha Rao of California State University-East Bay and co-author LLoyd Sloan, whose affiliation was not mentioned. Their research examined plagiarism among students to find any cultural connection. The results do reveal "significant differences" among students in the likelihood to plagiarize, but these did not relate to students' ethnic backgrounds, they report. Rather, the key factor is acculturation to American standards. The authors therefore see "significant implications for training and managing international students and workers."


Taken for granted: Ain't misbehavin'

According to studies reported in The New York Times in October, for example, half of the scientists queried in one survey in China claimed to know someone who had committed academic misconduct. In another survey, a third of scientists at top Chinese institutions said they had committed misconduct themselves.

The German model

Universities in Northeast Asia are "particularly prone to scientific scandal" because of a specific combination of structural factors, argue Schrank and Lee in their article. One structural factor is the enormous rewards that governments bestow on conspicuously successful senior scientists as incentives "to overtake their advanced industrial counterparts." The "illiberal laboratory cultures inherited from Germany by way of Japan" is another.

Numerous "high profile" cases have emerged in South Korea, Japan, and China, where some people "worry that disclosure is the exception to the rule, especially among the scientific elite," Schrank and Lee state. In the interview, Schrank hastens to acknowledge that American scientists also cheat, but, he adds, "We simply think that the incentive structure and the organizational structure in Northeast Asia are much more conducive to this type of fraud than either the incentive structure or the organizational structure in the United States."

Discouraging misconduct

So how do you lessen the likelihood of fraud? "I think the way to combat this is to recognize that it's not Asian culture, but that it's organizational, and then to think about what types of organizations militate against it," Schrank says. He cites as evidence Taiwan and Singapore, which share an Asian cultural background with China, South Korea, and Japan and "have pursued the same sort of intensive drive to give incentive for blockbuster publications, with monetary rewards," but haven't seen nearly as much scandal.

The reason? They "have broken with the German model. Taiwan is particularly interesting" because it used to follow the highly hierarchical German system, but it changed to the American one. Singapore has consistently followed a British system that is also similar to that of the United States.

The key is institutional structures that value, encourage, and reward skeptical interchange among personnel at all levels. Events such as a regularly scheduled lab meeting can discourage would-be cheaters "precisely because every week they have this confrontation and someone can call them on it." The research systems in more scandal-prone countries "don't have this sort of built-in mechanism for quality control, and as a result there isn't a structured space for that sort of challenge."

Rampant Fraud Threat to China’s Brisk Ascent

Thursday, February 3, 2011

How to be a successful scientist

http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/blog/posts/how-to-be-a-successful-scientist

Posted by Rachel Bowden on Jan 31, 2011

Darren Griffin's ten commandments for succeeding in academia

1. The only way to do good research is to get on with it
"There's no point having really good ideas if you don't put them into action," says Griffin. "Write those grants, write those papers."

2. When opportunity knocks, open the door
Be prepared to take risks with new ventures: "If there's an opportunity there for you and it's in your interests to pursue it, then get on and do it."

3. With good people you can do anything
Griffin says interacting with his team is one of the most rewarding aspects of his work, and he's not afraid of high achievers. "You should only take someone on if they can do something you can't," he says. "Your whole operation will only grow if you've got people who are better than you are, and you shouldn't be ashamed or insecure about that."

Man in reflective pose - Punchstock4. It's not about your knowledge - it's about imagination and ideas
Although a certain level of knowledge is essential, Griffin says you can always look up anything else you need to know - what you should focus on is coming up with new ideas. And as well as drawing on the talent in your team, you should also turn to your peers for inspiration. "Science is very much a social activity - you've got to get out there, network and have collaborators," says Griffin.

5. Always bring something to the party
It takes two to collaborate - if you don't have something to contribute, your partners will move on.

6. It's not the size of your gun, it's when you shoot
"It's a popular misconception that you just throw money and lots of people at an idea and it will work," says Griffin. Not always true, he says - you need to shoot at the right time to hit the target.

7. If the system doesn't work for you, change it, do something else or don't complain
Fairly self-explanatory, this one - be proactive and decisive, because "nobody likes a whinger".

8. Don't ask why, ask why not
"If you're a scientist, do not take no for an answer, because every no is one step closer to a yes," says Griffin. Be persistent and find out what you need to do to get that yes.

9. The journey is usually far more rewarding than the destination
So remember to enjoy the ride: "It's such a wonderful thing, being a scientist, because you're in the process of discovery, and that's a lot of fun."

10. Be nice to people
Of all the commandments, Griffin says this is ultimately the most important - not only because it's the right thing to do, but also because you never know when someone will have something that you want.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

The Perils of Unleashing Students' Skepticism


Don't always believe what scientists tell you. Be skeptical.

That's what I tell students in my history- of-science and science-writing classes. But some of them may have taken the lesson too much to heart.

I want to give my students the benefit of my hard-won knowledge of science's fallibility. Early in my career, I was a conventional gee-whiz science writer, easily impressed by scientists' claims. Fields such as physics, neuroscience, genetics, and artificial intelligence seemed to be bearing us toward a future in which bionic superhumans would zoom around the cosmos in warp-drive spaceships. Science was an "endless frontier," as the physicist Vannevar Bush put it in his famous 1945 report that paved the way for creation of the National Science Foundation.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Sabotage

"Postdoc Vipul Bhrigu destroyed a colleague's experiments (at University of Michigan) to get ahead. It took a hidder camera to expose a little-known, malicious side of science."