6 days ago
Fudging facts at Harvard: Professor Francesca Gino loses tenure over data fabrication
While Harvard is making headlines for its battle with 'Trump University' to effectively emerge as America's de facto opposition party, the Ivy League college has made news for another reason. It recently stripped behavioural scientist and till recently Harvard Business School professor Francesca Gino of her tenure. The charge: fabricating research data. The irony of ironies being that her research topic was 'Honesty and ethical behaviour'.It all began with the blog, 'Data Colada', an academic research watchdog since 2013 that carefully reanalyses published data to identify irregularities or potential fraud. Data Colada released claims in 2021 of extensive evidence of alleged fraud in four scholarly articles that Gino had co-authored.
The blog had expressed their worries to HBS four years ago, adding that none of Gino's co-authors were involved in fraud. After concluding that the 47-year-old academic had committed 'research misconduct intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly', Harvard initiated an internal inquiry, placing her on unpaid administrative leave in 2023. While examining version control in Microsoft Excel, it appeared that different rows inside a spreadsheet had been altered. According to experts, data before the suspected manipulation didn't reveal the effect the researchers wanted to observe. But data after the purported modification did seem to indicate participants were asked to complete insurance and tax forms in a study. It was discovered that people who were asked to sign declarations of truthfulness at the top of the page were more truthful than people who were asked to sign statements at the however, sued the university and her accusers for $25 mn, alleging defamation, gender discrimination and invasion of privacy. She claimed the accusations damaged her reputation. But last September, a federal judge in Boston rejected her defamation lawsuit, stating that, as a public figure, she was subject to scrutiny protected by the First Amendment. Since the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) established regulations regarding firings in the 1940s, Gino has now become the first Harvard professor to lose tenure.
This is hardly the first instance of academic misconduct involving data. A scandal involving Harvard Medical School's John Darsee shook the academic world in the 1980s. Darsee had published a significant number of papers in prestigious journals. However, by May 1981, his colleagues accused him of systematic and frequent fabrication. Investigators claimed that Darsee had presented data from experiments that were never conducted, and had 'expanded' other data to produce more significant results. Eventually, he had more than 80 papers removed from the literature. He was relieved of his posts at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital.
Academic data manipulation is likely to be rampant today. An average of 2% of scientists admitted at least one instance of fabricating, falsifying or altering data, according to a 2009 paper published in PLoS One, 'How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data'. Gino's - and Harvard's action against her - is a landmark case that could well serve as a model for how other academic institutions respond to allegations of academic dishonesty. On the flip side, excessively stringent enforcement could stifle creativity and run the risk of drawing unfavourable attention to organisations, thereby disincentivising them from taking action against unethical faculty is Gino's case, in particular, receiving so much public attention? She was one of Harvard's highest-paid professors, earning over $1 mn in 2018 and 2019. So, is it because the scam involves a star academic? Or is it due to the nature of the accusation - data manipulation? Does it have to do with data sanctity, integrity, dependability and trustworthiness? Does society care so much about data integrity? Apparently data evidence is nothing new to people in other professions. However, very few of them have jobs taken away from them for falsifying. The academic community has certainly become stricter about research misconduct involving data, and Gino was undoubtedly punished because academicians are subject to more stringent codes of conduct and constant scrutiny from peers than in other professions. In a sense, a watchdog got bit by watchdogs. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. The answer to companies not incurring capex may lie in stock markets
Banks are investing in these funds instead of lending the money. Why?
He termed IndiGo a 'paan ki dukaan'. Still made INR30k crore by selling its shares
How Sikka turned Infosys misfortune into AI springboard
Stock Radar: PNB stock breaks out from downward sloping channel; time to buy the PSU bank?
Buy, Sell or Hold: Nuvama maintains a hold rating on Vodafone Idea & Reduce rating on Bata India post Q4 results
Ignore volatility and look for long-term opportunities: 5 mid-cap stocks from different sectors with upside potential of over 23%
Transformation is painful but good in the long term: 7 auto stocks with an upside potential of up to 35%
