Great talk by @MicrobiomDigest on „The Dark Side of Science“ at #ecsj22 with lots of examples of duplication 
Bik scanned more than 20,000 papers by eye (mostly biomedical research).
She found that about 800 papers had duplicated figures and estimates that about half of them were likely intentional
She found that about 800 papers had duplicated figures and estimates that about half of them were likely intentional
Bik points out that journals reeeaaaally drag their feet in correcting/retracting papers. „If I can spot this in 2 seconds why does it take 5 years to be retracted?!“
(FWIW, completely agree that this is one of the most frustrating aspects of misconduct in science.)
(FWIW, completely agree that this is one of the most frustrating aspects of misconduct in science.)
„There was just a whole campaign against me“, says @MicrobiomDigest, talking about the hydroxychloroquine/Didier Raoult saga. She was doxxed, people manipulated her wikipedia entry.
„I know this is the price I have to pay for criticizing people, but I'm not going to stop.“
„I know this is the price I have to pay for criticizing people, but I'm not going to stop.“
Next frontier in data fabrication/image manipulation are AI-generated images, says Bik. „I think, as journalists and scientists, we need to think about these things“ #ECSJ2022
„I do think that as scientists, we focus way too much on scientific papers as a measure of a scientist productivity“, says @MicrobiomDigest.
„There's many other ways we can do that. And if we put too much pressure on science, then we will generate more misconduct.“ #ECSJ2022
„There's many other ways we can do that. And if we put too much pressure on science, then we will generate more misconduct.“ #ECSJ2022
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
