5 ms·
I didn't ask for it. I just found about it after the fact and not being a professor I have no say in the matter. Also, I'd prefer to keep my job since I have a
by rscho 6y ago
I didn't ask for it. I just found about it after the fact and not being a professor I have no say in the matter. Also, I'd prefer to keep my job since I have a family to feed.
Yes, the reanalysis is terrible and it follows from the fact that the base methodology is unsound.
- SubiculumCode 6y agoYou absolutely can ask to have your named removed. To be diplomatic, you can always claim that you didn't do enough to deserve credit. Even now, you could contact the journal to request the change. In your particular case, I will not contest that the reanalysis was terrible. My point was that reanalysis of a paper after an issue is raised is not automatically also crap. It may indeed be correcting the issue.
- rscho 6y agoYes, I could ask to lose my job. But again, I prefer not to. Research in certain (most?) fields is a dictatorship and even suggesting something to be fishy puts a target on your back. In this particular case, there were multiple outcomes tested (read: tens of them) and alpha was .05
- SubiculumCode 6y agoMan, all I can say is you are working for a bad prof then. I can't imagine any of my former advisors/colleagues/etc punishing me for declining to be a co-author.
- rscho 6y agoI am guessing that you don't do clinical research, then ;-)
- SubiculumCode 6y agoIm on the edge of clinical work. I work with some clinical people, but am not clinical myself. I would say that they are a bit more willing to be instrumental and throw a bunch of comparisons out and see what sticks. Its largely because of a lack of awareness about statistical issues though, and they respond well to my objections.
- rscho 6y agoWell, most professors around here don't respond well at all to objections. All (MD) professors I've met are dangerous Excel spreadsheet warriors. Note that we have a statistician in our unit, that no one listens to because "we always did it that way, right?". However, in a wider view the issue is far bigger than that: for a clinician nowadays it's become basically impossible to both be a really honest researcher while acquiring sufficient publication velocity to rise above. In a word, our system selects for bad actors.
- frostburg 6y agoI occasionally help this sort of people process and visualize data (they ignore their own internal statisticians, of course), but they're friends, so I can shut them down when needed. I have heard the term "retrospective control group" being used.
- samatman 6y agoI'm reminded of a bit of dialogue from Fight Club: "Which car company do you work for?" "...a major one."
- oldgradstudent 6y agoDo they produce mere noise, or there's additional fraud involved?
- rscho 6y agoNoise. But don't judge too harshly, it's actually like that everywhere I got to work.
- oldgradstudent 6y agoThat's why I judge it so harshly.
- caddemon 6y agoMaybe it's a field specific thing, or maybe one of the other authors pretended to be you, but I am surprised something could be published with your name on the author list without you knowing about it. Every paper I've ever been listed on, sometimes 10+ authors deep, has required me to confirm that I want my name on the paper/attest I contributed.
- dekhn 6y agoyou absolutely have a say in the matter of having your name included in any publication list. If a paper was submitted with your name and you don't support it, let the PI know, and send a letter to the editor asking for the paper to be withdrawn or retracted.