Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #PruittData
Most recents (2)
Another author removes themselves from a paper associated w #Pruittdata. This is a difficult situation but important convo to have - what are authors to do when they feel like they can't trust the data in their own papers anymore, but a retraction is not (yet) possible/allowed?
I've been thinking about this issue all night and I have some thoughts. What are the guidelines we use to retract/correct papers? Are these the right ones? What do we value in our papers? How do we move forward as a field? A 🧵 1/
(I want to be clear here and say that I am offering my opinion as a professional scientist on a topic of general importance to our field. While my personal experiences may have helped form my opinions, these thoughts are not directly about any particular instance 2/)
After #PruittGate, #PruittData, or #perchgate, people wonder why someone would tamper with their own data. If I look at my own experience in prominent places (Ivy League and others), it seems pretty obvious.
PIs do not have much time to do research. Superstars have even less time. The time devoted to experimental work is obviously scarce. But the time for the kind of deep boring and stressful thinking you have to do to come up with new ideas is also running out.
They then seem more interested in the story they are following than in an impartial quest for knowledge. As long as they continue the story that made them stars, no one will wonder what they are doing.
