Harvard just fired a tenured professor for the first time in 80 years. Good.
is a senior writer at Future Perfect, Vox's effective altruism-inspired section on the world's biggest challenges. She explores wide-ranging topics like climate change, artificial intelligence, vaccine development, and factory farms, and also writes the Future Perfect newsletter.
The Harvard University crest on the Baker Library of the Harvard Business School in Boston on May 27. Sophie Park/Bloomberg via Getty Images
In the summer of 2023, I wrote about a shocking scandal at Harvard Business School: Star professor Francesca Gino had been accused of falsifying data in four of her published papers, with whispers there was falsification in others, too.
A series of posts on Data Colada, a blog that focuses on research integrity, documented Gino's apparent brazen data manipulation, which involved clearly changing study data to better support her hypotheses.
Future Perfect
Explore the big, complicated problems the world faces and the most efficient ways to solve them. Sent twice a week. Email (required)
Sign Up
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
This was a major accusation against a researcher at the top of her field, but Gino's denials were unconvincing. She didn't have a good explanation for what had gone wrong, asserting that maybe a research assistant had done it, even though she was the only author listed across all four of the falsified studies. Harvard put her on unpaid administrative leave and barred her from campus.
The cherry on top? Gino's main academic area of study was honesty in business.
As I wrote at the time, my read of the evidence was that Gino had most likely committed fraud. That impression was only reinforced by her subsequent lawsuit against Harvard and the Data Colada authors. Gino complained that she'd been defamed and that Harvard hadn't followed the right investigation process, but she didn't offer any convincing explanation of how she'd ended up putting her name to paper after paper with fake data.
This week, almost two years after the news first broke, the process has reached its resolution: Gino was stripped of tenure, the first time Harvard has essentially fired a tenured professor in at least 80 years. (Her defamation lawsuit against the bloggers who found the data manipulation was dismissed last year.)
What we do right and wrong when it comes to scientific fraud
Harvard is in the news right now for its war with the Trump administration, which has sent a series of escalating demands to the university, canceled billions of dollars in federal grants and contracts, and is now blocking the university from enrolling international students, all in an apparent attempt to force the university to conform to MAGA's ideological demands.
Stripping a celebrity professor of tenure might not seem like the best look at a moment when Harvard is in an existential struggle for its right to exist as an independent academic institution. But the Gino situation, which long predates the conflict with Trump, shouldn't be interpreted solely through the lens of that fight.
Scientific fraud is a real problem, one that is chillingly common across academia. But far from putting the university in a bad light, Harvard's handling of the Gino case has actually been unusually good, even though it still underscores just how much further academia has to go to ensure scientific fraud becomes rare and is reliably caught and punished.
There are two parts to fraud response: catching it and punishing it.
Academia clearly isn't very good at the first part. The peer-review process that all meaningful research undergoes tends to start from the default assumption that data in a reviewed paper is real, and instead focuses on whether the paper represents a meaningful advance and is correctly positioned with respect to other research. Almost no reviewer is going back to check to see if what is described in a paper actually happened.
Fraud, therefore, is often caught only when other researchers actively try to replicate a result or take a close look at the data. Science watchdogs who find these fraud cases tell me that we need a strong expectation that data be made public — which makes it much harder to fake — as well as a scientific culture that embraces replications. (Given the premiums journals put on novelty in research and the supreme importance of publishing for academic careers, there's been little motivation for scientists to pursue replication.).
It is these watchdogs, not anyone at Harvard or in the peer-review process, who caught the discrepancies that ultimately sunk Gino.
Crime and no punishment
Even when fraud is caught, academia too often fails to properly punish it.
When third-party investigators bring a concern to the attention of a university, it's been unusual for the responsible party to actually face consequences. One of Gino's co-authors on one of the retracted papers was Dan Ariely, a star professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University. He, too, has been credibly accused of falsifying data: For example, he published one study that he claimed took place at UCLA with the assistance of researcher Aimee Drolet Rossi. But UCLA says the study didn't happen there, and Rossi says she did not participate in it.
In a past case, he claimed on a podcast to have gotten data from the insurance company Delta Dental, which the company says it did not collect. In another case, an investigation by Duke reportedly found that data from a paper he co-authored with Gino had been falsified, but that there was no evidence Ariely had used fake data knowingly.
Frankly, I don't buy this. Maybe an unlucky professor might once end up using data that was faked without their knowledge. But if it happens again, I'm not willing to credit bad luck, and at some point, a professor who keeps 'accidentally' using falsified or nonexistent data should be out of a job even if we can't prove it was no accident. But Ariely, who has maintained his innocence, is still at Duke.
Or take Olivier Voinnet, a plant biologist who had multiple papers conclusively demonstrated to contain image manipulation. He was found guilty of misconduct and suspended for two years. It's hard to imagine a higher scientific sin than faking and manipulating data. If you can't lose your job for that, the message to young scientists is inevitably that fraud isn't really that serious.
What it means to take fraud seriously
Gino's loss of tenure, which is one of a few recent cases where misconduct has had major career consequences, might be a sign that the tides are changing. In 2023, around when the Gino scandal broke, Stanford's then-president Marc Tessier-Lavigne stepped down after 12 papers he authored were found to contain manipulated data. A few weeks ago, MIT announced a data falsification scandal with a terse announcement that the university no longer had confidence in a widely distributed paper 'by a former second-year PhD student.' It's reasonable to assume the student was expelled from the program.
I hope that these high-profile cases are a sign we are moving in the right direction on scientific fraud because its persistence is enormously damaging to science. Other researchers waste time and energy following false lines of research substantiated by fake data; in medicine, falsification can outright kill people. But even more than that, research fraud damages the reputation of science at exactly the moment when it is most under attack.
We should tighten standards to make fraud much harder to commit in the first place, and when it is identified, the consequences should be immediate and serious. Let's hope Harvard sets a trend.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Profit and Power
Editor's Note: Washington Week With The Atlantic is a partnership between NewsHour Productions, WETA, and The Atlantic airing every Friday on PBS stations nationwide. Check your local listings, watch full episodes here, or listen to the weekly podcast here. Donald Trump's willingness to mix public office with personal benefit is facing scrutiny, as are his latest pardons. Panelists on Washington Week With The Atlantic joined last night to discuss how the president may be using his power to profit, and more. Meanwhile, Trump's battle with Harvard continued this week. Panelists considered how that fight is being received by voters and Republican lawmakers—and whether the president's continued crackdown on higher education could have political consequences. For Republicans, Trump's action against Harvard is 'not something that they want to break with the president on,' Leigh Ann Caldwell said last night. 'This is not an issue that they're willing to stand in front of him on, like most issues.' Joining the editor in chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, to discuss this and more: Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for The New York Times; Leigh Ann Caldwell, the chief Washington correspondent at Puck; and Stephen Hayes, the editor of The Dispatch. Watch the full episode here. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Fox News
8 hours ago
- Fox News
DOUG SCHOEN: I'm a Harvard grad. Here's my take what Trump's doing right and wrong
The ongoing fight between the Trump administration and Harvard University has – unfortunately – taken on a life of its own. I say unfortunately, not because I believe the reforms President Donald Trump is demanding are wholly out of bounds – they are not, by any means. Rather, I say this because, as an alum of both Harvard undergrad and law school – and a longtime donor – the rampant antisemitism on campus, as well as the university's imperiousness, I cannot fault the White House for acting. Indeed, there is a legitimate argument to be made that Harvard must be reined in. That being said, there are concerns unique to Harvard that separate it from other universities. These concerns range from its handling of antisemitism, its silencing of voices who do not conform to far-left orthodoxy, as well as who it has hired. Notably, the concerns surrounding Harvard did not originate with its handling of antisemitism in the wake of Hamas' October 7th attack on Israel. It has long been the epicenter of Diversity, Education, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts in the U.S., to the point where the Supreme Court was forced to strike down its admissions criteria for being unfair to Asian students in June 2023. And yet, within just the past month, two serious incidents underscore how much further Harvard has to go in order to reform and redeem itself. First, the Harvard Law Review awarded a $65,000 grant to Ibraham Bharmal, after the Harvard Law School student was charged with assaulting an Israeli student, an incident caught on video. In effect, Harvard not only tolerated Bharmal's antisemitism, but rewarded it with a taxpayer-funded grant after he assaulted another student solely because of his nationality and Jewish identity. Second, Harvard recently revoked the tenure of Francesca Gino, a professor of business administration - who ironically is "well known for studying honesty" as Pilar Arias noted – after a four-year long fight over Gino's repeated falsification of data. To be clear, this is not to say that I agree with every action Trump has taken against Harvard. For example, blanket bans on accepting foreign students is excessive, but vetting their social media is inherently reasonable. Universities routinely do this for American students; thus it stands to reason Harvard should have the same – or even stricter – policy for foreigners. To that end, Harvard professor Steven Pinker recently published a piece in the New York Times which does a tremendous job at capturing the issues Harvard must address and the best ways to do so. Pinker, who makes his frustration towards the school's handling of antisemitism, free speech, hiring practices, and more very clear, makes one more key point: while Harvard has its "serious ailments," the reaction must also be calibrated. In other words, while Harvard should not have unfettered access to billions of dollars of taxpayer money, there is a real risk that across-the-board cuts harm America's scientific prowess without producing the – very necessary – reforms Trump is demanding. There is ample opportunity for a more targeted approach that can force Harvard to make these necessary changes without destroying the school's leadership in many vital fields. For instance, grants to social sciences can be canceled without touching money that funds medical or scientific research into cancer or other diseases. And while I agree with Pinker on that and other points he makes, perhaps the most important thing he points out is that the only thing thus far that has spurred Harvard to take any steps towards change has been Trump. As Pinker puts it, "The uncomfortable fact is that many of these reforms followed Mr. Trump's inauguration and overlap with his demands." Of course, it should not take the President of the United States to bring American universities inline with their own codes of conduct. Nor should it take the power of the White House to force Harvard to crackdown on the scourge of antisemitism and anti-American extremism that has overrun its campus. And yet, this is where we now find ourselves. It is my hope, as an alum, and as an American, that the Trump administration and Harvard come to a solution whereby the university realizes it cannot continue to permit – or reward – students who so blatantly violate the code of conduct, either of the university or of the United States.
New York Post
8 hours ago
- New York Post
Canadian PM's daughter one of international students caught in Trump-Harvard row
The daughter of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney could be barred from returning to Harvard University in the fall thanks to the ongoing standoff between the Trump administration and the Ivy League school, The Post has learned. Cleo Carney, who grew up in London while her father was Governor of the Bank of England, just finished her freshman year at the embattled Cambridge-based institution. She's one of the nearly-7,000 international students whose time at Harvard could end after Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem moved to terminate the school's student visa program for the 2025-2026 school year. 6 Cleo Carney introduced her father to the stage after he became Prime Minister in March. Associated Press The younger Carney is following in her father's footsteps, pursuing a bachelor's in economics at the university. Mark Carney — who spent a number of years south of the 49th parallel but now talks tough about the US — is a Harvard grad. Cleo is due to return in September for her second year of classes. Foreign students like Carney — who make up more than a quarter of Harvard's student body — could be forced to transfer to other institutions or lose their legal status after the university refused a request to turn over foreign students' records, including any video or audio of their protest activity in the past five years. Though a Massachusetts judge issued a preliminary injunction against the federal government Thursday, the saga is not over. 6 Cleo is following in her father's footsteps, studying economics at Harvard University. REUTERS 6 Cleo has been in the public eye since her father became Canada's new prime minister this spring. AP The White House confirmed Carney, along with other international students, would get the boot if the administration gets its way. 'The President's goal is clear: we will put America first, and that means our policies on everything from trade to immigration should benefit Americans, not other nations at the expense of our people,' a senior administration official told The Post. 6 President Trump has been fighting with Harvard University for months. REUTERS The row comes during what's already an especially tense time between the two nations, with Canadians enraged at President Trump's repeated threats to make the Great White North the 51st US state and a trade war between the two countries. The daughter of the prime minister isn't the only VIP international student whose future at the Ivy League is in jeopardy. 6 More than a quarter of Harvard's student body is international. REUTERS Belgium's Princess Elisabeth, 23, is working on a two-year master's degree in public policy at Harvard.. Belgium's Royal Palace said the heir to the throne was waiting to find out whether she can return to Harvard for her second year. 6 The future Queen of Belgium is doing a Master's in public policy at the Ivy League. Max Bueno / Belgian Royal Palace Trump this week said admitting more American students would make Harvard 'great again.' 'They can't get in because we have foreign students there,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Wednesday. 'Harvard is treating our country with great disrespect.' Carney's office did not respond to The Post's request for comment.
