3 ms·
It's confusing because some of the incidents had image manipulation, but apparently no evidence of deceit. Some others involved data collected at labs not belon
by matthewdgreen 3y ago
It's confusing because some of the incidents had image manipulation, but apparently no evidence of deceit. Some others involved data collected at labs not belonging to the four authors accused. But there are six papers being retracted, but no real details in that article on who did what and what exactly happened there.
- svnt 3y ago“No evidence of deceit” but the data show no effect while you accidentally published an image from some supposedly “early/exploratory” analysis that does show an effect. What would be the evidence of deceit you’d expect to find here? A video of a monologue by the evil villain disclosing their intention to deceive readers because they believe no one will reproduce their analysis before they get their promotion?
- jassyr 3y agoI agree. You can infer that falsely creating positive results leads to funding leads to prestige, fancy dinners and fancy homes, fancy educations and large inflated egos.