The big kerfuffle in science Twitter today is that Marc Tessier-Lavigne, the President of Stanford University, is being investigated for falsified images (i.e. data) in some of his research papers.
There have been several scientist who have flagged his stuff over the years as suspicious, but nothing really came of it until now.
I’m a neurobiologist myself and I looked at a bunch of the manipulated images. This is not good. The manipulated images appear in some papers where he is the lead author, and/or is one of only two authors. That means he can’t just claim that his co-authors did all of this without his knowledge.
The people they interview will say prudent things about waiting to hear what the probe reveals, and that they can’t be sure, prior to a full investigation, that he deliberately presented fraudulent data. But I can say what most of them are thinking, which is that there’s no way this was done without an intent to mislead. I hope he goes down.
The last one took the fall for the organization as its leader. Unusual in our modern age to say “happened on my watch”. Far less clear that he actually was involved or had direct knowledge. But he had direct reports!
If it turns out to be true, that person’s career is essentially over. Hope it was worth it. For running an Ivy League institution of higher education, that person sure is as dumb as a box of rocks.
I will say that the way Stanford is handling this issue is very concerning to me and is decreasing my respect for its integrity. Stanford is an extremely wealthy institution, not one teetering on the financial edge in fear of closing due to low enrollment. Why on earth would they have chosen to do an internal investigation instead of hiring an external team? The only reasons I can think of do not place the university in a good light. Not only that, but only one of the members was a scientist? And the scientist had $18 million worth of conflict of interest that either was not disclosed or wasn’t cared about, until the paper started asking questions? Frankly, the manner that Stanford has chosen to conduct this investigation is making me ill.
What has the reaction been in the scientific and university communities, outside of Stanford? Would it be typical for the scientific journals to remain mum if an author with less prestige/influence had similar questions being raised about their work?
I was dismayed to learn that this guy is apparently a billionaire?! Geez. Meanwhile I was having dinner tonight with an academic scientist at an R1 whose kids are all getting full tuition covered by need-based aid (including Pell grants) because of his low salary. There are haves and have-nots, and the discrepancy is depressing. The fact that this much of the Stanford guy’s work wasn’t even honest makes it that much worse.
Universities often rally around powerful professors behaving badly. It is not unusual for them to close ranks and deny that anything was wrong. Happens a lot with sexual misconduct and research misconduct. It sucks. This is a particularly notable version of it. My own department is in the middle of a total s***storm of this type right now.
I am sure that nothing would have happened had the PubPeer scientists not flagged the work over and over again, and had it not been publicized.
Journals vary in their responses to reports of suspected fraud. Some are great, some are so-so, and some won’t retract an article until the press gets bad enough. Academic scientists are pissed about this current situation.
Some of this is par for the course (though disgusting and wrong). But I’m sure the elite status and wealth of the Stanford president has protected him waaaaay more than a plebe.
by now.