Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Ryan Mitchell Wittingslow's avatar
  2. Jason Stanley's avatar
  3. Daniel Greco's avatar
  4. Nobody's avatar
  5. Roger of Invisible America's avatar
  6. Santa Monica's avatar
  7. Optimistic about LLM's avatar

Another case of apparent data fraud, this time by a psychologist at Harvard Business School

From CHE:  

Three studies co-authored by Francesca Gino, a professor at Harvard Business School, are on their way to being retracted following allegations that they contain fraudulent data.

A trio of academics have been writing a series of posts on their blog, Data Colada, about what they characterize as evidence of fraud in four of the renowned behavioral scientist’s papers. Their findings were sent to Harvard in the fall of 2021, the bloggers wrote, and the university was seeking to have them retracted.

Their allegations, along with their suggestion that “many more Gino-authored papers” could “contain fake data,” have set off a panic among Gino’s dozens of collaborators. Now that Gino is on administrative leave, as The Chronicle reported this month, many researchers are looking with suspicion at the scholar, who rose to prominence for her eye-catching research into — among other things — dishonesty…..

The fourth paper that the Data Colada bloggers examined — and the first that they wrote about — was published in 2012. It found that signing an honesty pledge at the top of a form, rather than at the bottom, decreased cheating. A number of rows in the dataset appeared to have been manually tampered with, the data detectives wrote, in a way that bolstered the result that signing at the top decreased cheating.

But it can’t get retracted — because it already has been. That happened in the fall of 2021, after Data Colada found separate evidence of fraud in the third experiment in the paper. That data had been procured from an insurance company by only one co-author, Dan Ariely of Duke, who has denied being the one who fabricated it.

As Professor Brian Skyrms, who flagged this for me, quipped: "It seems that data manipulation pays off very well if you don’t get caught."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

3 responses to “Another case of apparent data fraud, this time by a psychologist at Harvard Business School”

  1. Enrique Guerra-Pujol

    Until courts begin to impose legal liability on authors and predatory journals, nothing will change. See: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2669118

  2. Data manipulation pays off even if you do get caught. The Atlantic reports about Gino: "She regularly taught classes for business executives, and some among her colleagues at Harvard Business School make nearly $2 million in annual salary."

    Also, Gino got caught only because she left trails that are so obvious that it's comical. Read the very amusing Datacolada blog posts!

  3. Hilarious that some very simple steps could have been taken to avoid being caught, like sorting the data and copying the data into a fresh Excel sheet with no formulas before releasing it to the public. This sounds like someone who had gotten so used to fabricating data they no longer found it necessary to take basic precautions.

    —–
    KEYWORDS:
    Primary Blog

Designed with WordPress