3 ms·

> What really annoys me in these situations is how the institutions show loyalty to the people who did research misconduct. "Loyalty" means different things to

by neilv 3y ago

> What really annoys me in these situations is how the institutions show loyalty to the people who did research misconduct. "Loyalty" means different things to different people, and not necessarily "doing what that party wants". So, if you don't call this "loyalty", it might be easier to imagine more of the possible/likely reasons for doing something that coincides with what that party wants, in an instance.

SiempreViernes 3y ago
I'm wondering if the loyalty really is with the cheater, or if they are instead trying to protect weaker parties like the students and post-docs that can be largely or event entirely innocent. The latter option is possible and hard to discern from the outside.
- neilv 3y ago
  Yes, and some academics have altruistic hearts of gold. (I used to assume they were all like that, and that was half the reason I wanted to be a professor, thinking of the university as a testbed or incubator for a better world.) As an exercise to flesh out the space of possible reasons for behavior that seems misaligned with academic ideals, you can also imagine different characteristics and profiles of some hypothetical academics: selfish self-interest and a touch of ethical flexibility (that might've given them an edge to get to the position of influence), arrogance (from the position or other reasons), personal relationships (these are colleagues, often friends, sometimes more), group solidarity, normal human biases, funding politics, being beholden to organizations that are cynical or misaligned with what a good academic would do.
DonsDiscountGas 3y ago
"Who should I believe, some random blogger or this person I've known for years?" Oftentimes the answer is "random blogger" but it's really not that surprising that people trust their friends more than strangers.
- eviks 3y ago
  And if it's not a random blogger, but a team of professionals?

by neilv 3y ago

SiempreViernes 3y ago

I'm wondering if the loyalty really is with the cheater, or if they are instead trying to protect weaker parties like the students and post-docs that can be largely or event entirely innocent. The latter option is possible and hard to discern from the outside.

neilv 3y ago
Yes, and some academics have altruistic hearts of gold. (I used to assume they were all like that, and that was half the reason I wanted to be a professor, thinking of the university as a testbed or incubator for a better world.) As an exercise to flesh out the space of possible reasons for behavior that seems misaligned with academic ideals, you can also imagine different characteristics and profiles of some hypothetical academics: selfish self-interest and a touch of ethical flexibility (that might've given them an edge to get to the position of influence), arrogance (from the position or other reasons), personal relationships (these are colleagues, often friends, sometimes more), group solidarity, normal human biases, funding politics, being beholden to organizations that are cynical or misaligned with what a good academic would do.

DonsDiscountGas 3y ago

"Who should I believe, some random blogger or this person I've known for years?" Oftentimes the answer is "random blogger" but it's really not that surprising that people trust their friends more than strangers.

eviks 3y ago
And if it's not a random blogger, but a team of professionals?