5 ms·

The Ivy leagues cannot catch a break. I imagine this stuff happens at state schools too, but yet another nail in the coffin of their reputation. Sincerely, a

The Ivy leagues cannot catch a break. I imagine this stuff happens at state schools too, but yet another nail in the coffin of their reputation. Sincerely, a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but makes a ton of money because I know 4 skills that synergize and scarce.

lusus_naturae 3y ago
The ivy/state dichotomy is unnecessary for research quality as it depends more on the research capacity and capability of an institution, e.g. if its an R1 vs. R2. You're probably right that perverse incentives degrade or corrupt research anywhere--it's a systemic problem. Moreover, any discussion of research ethics that doesn't include industry or industry-sponsored work is incomplete. If scientists had more than a citation index to establish productivity so that they can justify getting or keeping funding, the community could probably make some headway towards addressing behavior such as Gino's. Outright fraud is less prevalent than bad science or misinterpreted or misunderstood results. Personally I am in favor of a replication index for all original work, at least.
- th230603 3y ago
  Gino worked for a business school, as did several of her collaborators. Often for business school profs, their work will be judged less on academic acceptance (peer-reviewed publication, etc) and more on its 'real-world impact'. You are seen as a good academic of marketing if you can market yourself into Ted talks, pop science publications, and ultimately, influence on 'decision-makers' (the sort of politicians and thinktanks who believe that eg healthcare can be solved by painting hospitals orange). So there are strong incentives to falsify results but they are quite different from those which bear on actual scientists.
Yajirobe 3y ago
> Sincerely, a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but makes a ton of money Hey, good for you!
mahathu 3y ago
> Sincerely, a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but makes a ton of money I always find it odd when people choose this as a metric for success. Why not "a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but has a job they enjoy deeply and that gives them purpose"?
- grumple 3y ago
  I think this arises because we view academics as accomplished experts within their walled gardens, but don't bestow a similar place in the real estate of the mind to people who have been successful at applying their skills in the real world.
- archontes 3y ago
  Ikigai.
- bhouston 3y ago
  It is not that dissimilar as branding in the real world. There are a ton of great little restaurants, but when you don't have time to really explore, some many small restaurants are also horrible, you pick a brand you are familiar with. The reason is that you know what to expect. Similar to why so many people want to get Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, etc on their resume. While there are a ton of amazing small companies they just do not have the same brand recongition. I think the economic term for this is "signalling." Having associating with these brand name schools gives you instant credibility: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > I always find it odd when people choose this as a metric for success. Why not "a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but has a job they enjoy deeply and that gives them purpose"? It's not odd. If your metric was "be as useful as possible to others" then making lots of money is an excellent proxy metric.
Roark66 3y ago
>Sincerely, a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but makes a ton of money because I know 4 skills that synergize and scarce. I always thought people in academia don't really make much money compared with what they could make in business. Adding to it that it takes a very long time and lots of hard work to get "to the top - get tenure" I'm amazed we're still seeing any scientific progress being made.
gregshap 3y ago
The headline gets way more engagement when it's Harvard. Kind of like Foxconn headlines with "Apple factory" not Nokia factory etc.
eduction 3y ago
This is just supposition but it's entirely possible there is some causality at play. The ivies are the most competitive universities in the U.S. (modulo some outliers like Stanford and MIT). If you are successful at cheating in academia then by definition you are going to end up teaching/researching at a more competitive university.
spywaregorilla 3y ago
The Ivy leagues catch tons of breaks because they don't even notice this kind of thing. It's a complete non issue
mistermann 3y ago
> because I know 4 skills that synergize and are scarce. Those would be? (Asking sincerely.)

lusus_naturae 3y ago

The ivy/state dichotomy is unnecessary for research quality as it depends more on the research capacity and capability of an institution, e.g. if its an R1 vs. R2. You're probably right that perverse incentives degrade or corrupt research anywhere--it's a systemic problem. Moreover, any discussion of research ethics that doesn't include industry or industry-sponsored work is incomplete. If scientists had more than a citation index to establish productivity so that they can justify getting or keeping funding, the community could probably make some headway towards addressing behavior such as Gino's. Outright fraud is less prevalent than bad science or misinterpreted or misunderstood results. Personally I am in favor of a replication index for all original work, at least.

th230603 3y ago
Gino worked for a business school, as did several of her collaborators. Often for business school profs, their work will be judged less on academic acceptance (peer-reviewed publication, etc) and more on its 'real-world impact'. You are seen as a good academic of marketing if you can market yourself into Ted talks, pop science publications, and ultimately, influence on 'decision-makers' (the sort of politicians and thinktanks who believe that eg healthcare can be solved by painting hospitals orange). So there are strong incentives to falsify results but they are quite different from those which bear on actual scientists.

Yajirobe 3y ago

> Sincerely, a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but makes a ton of money Hey, good for you!

mahathu 3y ago

> Sincerely, a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but makes a ton of money I always find it odd when people choose this as a metric for success. Why not "a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but has a job they enjoy deeply and that gives them purpose"?

grumple 3y ago
I think this arises because we view academics as accomplished experts within their walled gardens, but don't bestow a similar place in the real estate of the mind to people who have been successful at applying their skills in the real world.
archontes 3y ago
Ikigai.
bhouston 3y ago
It is not that dissimilar as branding in the real world. There are a ton of great little restaurants, but when you don't have time to really explore, some many small restaurants are also horrible, you pick a brand you are familiar with. The reason is that you know what to expect. Similar to why so many people want to get Google, Meta, Microsoft, Apple, etc on their resume. While there are a ton of amazing small companies they just do not have the same brand recongition. I think the economic term for this is "signalling." Having associating with these brand name schools gives you instant credibility: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
robertlagrant 3y ago
> I always find it odd when people choose this as a metric for success. Why not "a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but has a job they enjoy deeply and that gives them purpose"? It's not odd. If your metric was "be as useful as possible to others" then making lots of money is an excellent proxy metric.

Roark66 3y ago

>Sincerely, a person who went to a school you've never heard of, but makes a ton of money because I know 4 skills that synergize and scarce. I always thought people in academia don't really make much money compared with what they could make in business. Adding to it that it takes a very long time and lots of hard work to get "to the top - get tenure" I'm amazed we're still seeing any scientific progress being made.

gregshap 3y ago

The headline gets way more engagement when it's Harvard. Kind of like Foxconn headlines with "Apple factory" not Nokia factory etc.

eduction 3y ago

This is just supposition but it's entirely possible there is some causality at play. The ivies are the most competitive universities in the U.S. (modulo some outliers like Stanford and MIT). If you are successful at cheating in academia then by definition you are going to end up teaching/researching at a more competitive university.

spywaregorilla 3y ago

The Ivy leagues catch tons of breaks because they don't even notice this kind of thing. It's a complete non issue

mistermann 3y ago

> because I know 4 skills that synergize and are scarce. Those would be? (Asking sincerely.)