This Scientist catches FRAUD in Harvard and Stanford Research

Summary

In a revealing interview, Elizabeth Bick, a renowned science data image detective, shares her journey and techniques in uncovering image fraud in academic papers. With a PhD in microbiology and 15 years at Stanford, Bick transitioned to full-time investigation, using her keen eye and software like Image Twin and PRIC to detect duplications. Her work has led to significant revelations, including fraud in papers by high-profile scientists, highlighting a culture in academia that often prioritizes sensationalism over truth. Bick's insights into the challenges of addressing these issues within the scientific community underscore the need for systemic change and integrity in research.

Takeaways

• 💚 Elizabeth Bick is celebrated as a hero in science for her work in uncovering image fraud in academic papers.
• 📌 She played a crucial role in revealing image manipulation in the work of high-profile figures, including a Stanford University president and a Nobel Prize winner.
• 🔍 Bick's background is in microbiology, and she has spent over 15 years at Stanford before becoming a full-time science data image detective in 2019.
• 👁‍🗨️ Her primary method involves using her keen observational skills to detect duplications and manipulations in scientific images, although she also uses software tools like ImageTwin and PRIC.
• 🛠️ The use of software like ImageTwin has significantly aided her in identifying fraudulent images that would be challenging to detect with the naked eye alone.
• 📚 Bick's talent for spotting patterns is a key asset in her work, drawing parallels between natural uniqueness and the expected variance in scientific imagery.
• 👨‍🔬 She advocates for incorporating image verification software into the peer review process to catch academic misconduct more efficiently.
• 🚫 Many of the image manipulations Bick uncovers are symptomatic of broader issues within research culture, such as a preference for quantity over quality and a lack of integrity.
• 💡 The problems in academic research are often linked to toxic lab cultures, including bullying and the exploitation of researchers on temporary visas.
• 🛡️ Despite uncovering numerous cases of fraud, Bick expresses frustration over the lack of action taken by publishers and editors, likening it to consumer rights issues.

Q & A

Who is Elizabeth Bick and what is she known for?

Elizabeth Bick is a microbiologist known for her work in identifying image fraud in academic papers, notably uncovering evidence of image manipulation in research by prominent figures such as Mark Tessier-Lavigne, Greg Semenza, and Khed Sha.

What led to Mark Tessier-Lavigne stepping down from his position at Stanford University?

Mark Tessier-Lavigne stepped down from his position as the president of Stanford University following allegations of image fraud in his papers, uncovered by Elizabeth Bick.

How does Elizabeth Bick find evidence of image fraud in scientific papers?

Elizabeth Bick primarily uses her eyes to detect duplications and manipulations in images within scientific papers. She looks for identical images, overlapping panels, or duplications within a panel. In recent years, she has also utilized software, such as Image Twin and PRIC, to help identify these duplications more efficiently.

What software does Elizabeth Bick use to assist in her investigations?

Elizabeth Bick uses software packages like Image Twin and PRIC to help identify duplications and manipulations in scientific images. Image Twin, for instance, has a database of images that can help find duplications across different papers.

How did Elizabeth Bick's use of software lead to the discovery of fraudulent images in Khed Sha's research?

Through the use of Image Twin, Elizabeth Bick was able to identify multiple instances of duplicated images in Khed Sha's work that were taken from completely different papers and even from websites selling scientific equipment, which were falsely presented as original research evidence.

Why does Elizabeth Bick believe that nature's uniqueness is crucial in spotting image fraud?

Elizabeth Bick points out that in nature, patterns are unique, such as no two leaves or rocks being identical. Similarly, in scientific images like cells or tissues, while patterns might be similar, they should not be identical. Spotting identical patterns is usually indicative of fraud, as it goes against the natural variability expected in scientific data.

What does Elizabeth Bick suggest about the culture in some research labs?

Elizabeth Bick suggests that a worryingly large number of research labs have a culture that prioritizes quantity over quality and sensationalism over truth. This culture, which often involves bullying and cutting corners, may contribute to the prevalence of data manipulation and fraud.

What motivates scientists to engage in image manipulation or data fraud, according to Elizabeth Bick?

Elizabeth Bick indicates that the motivation behind image manipulation or data fraud often stems from the culture of the research lab rather than the individuals being inherently evil. This culture promotes high output and significant results, sometimes at the cost of scientific integrity.

What challenges has Elizabeth Bick faced in getting academic journals to act on her findings?

Elizabeth Bick has expressed frustration with the lack of action from academic journals and publishers upon reporting cases of image fraud. She compares the situation to complaining about a faulty car and being told to just live with it, highlighting a systemic issue in scientific literature where editors are reluctant to address problems in peer-reviewed papers.

How does Elizabeth Bick view the role of software like Image Twin in the peer review process?

Elizabeth Bick believes that software like Image Twin should be integrated into the standard peer review process for papers containing images. She argues that this would make catching academic misconduct easier and more reliable, as well as help expand the software's database for detecting duplications, ultimately improving the integrity of scientific research.

Outlines

00:00

🔍 Unmasking Scientific Fraud: The Story of Elizabeth Bick

This section introduces Elizabeth Bick, a microbiologist turned science data image detective, renowned for her role in uncovering image fraud in academic papers, including those of high-profile figures like the former president of Stanford University and a Nobel Prize winner. Bick's meticulous eye for detail and the use of software tools like Image Twin and PRIC have been instrumental in her efforts to detect duplications and manipulations in scientific images, contributing to the integrity of academic research. Her journey from conducting her PhD in the Netherlands to becoming a full-time detective in the realm of science underscores the importance of vigilance and technology in maintaining the credibility of scientific literature.

05:01

🚨 The Underlying Causes of Scientific Misconduct

The second paragraph delves into the systemic issues within the academic world that foster scientific misconduct, highlighting a culture that prioritizes sensationalism and quantity over truth and quality. Elizabeth Bick's investigations, often initiated by tips about problematic lab cultures, reveal a troubling landscape of bullying, pressure to produce, and a lack of accountability that can lead researchers to commit fraud. This segment underscores the need for a shift in academic culture towards one that values integrity over impact, suggesting that cases of image manipulation and data fraud are symptoms of a broader, toxic environment in scientific research.

Keywords

💡Image Fraud

Image fraud refers to the manipulation or fabrication of images in academic papers to falsely represent research findings. In the video, Elizabeth Bick is highlighted for her role in uncovering instances of image fraud in high-profile academic papers, including those by a Stanford University president and a Nobel Prize winner. This concept is central to the video's theme as it underscores the challenges and ethical issues within scientific research and publication.

💡Elizabeth Bick

Elizabeth Bick is a microbiologist and a science data image detective who specializes in identifying image fraud in scientific publications. Born and raised in the Netherlands, she has worked for 15 years at Stanford and, since 2019, has dedicated herself full-time to this unique role. The video focuses on her contributions to enhancing the integrity of scientific research by exposing fraudulent images in academic papers.

💡Peer Review

Peer review is the process by which academic papers are evaluated by other experts in the field before publication. It is mentioned in the video as a critical step in ensuring the quality and integrity of scientific literature. However, the video also suggests that the peer review process might not be equipped to catch certain types of fraud, such as image manipulation, without the help of specialized software or experts like Elizabeth Bick.

💡Software Tools

Software tools like Image Twin and Pric are mentioned as instrumental in Elizabeth Bick's work to detect duplications and manipulations in images within academic papers. These tools can compare images across different papers to identify duplicates, which is a capability beyond human detection alone. The video highlights these tools as essential for modernizing the peer review process and catching academic fraud more efficiently.

💡Academic Culture

Academic culture, particularly the aspects that prioritize quantity over quality and sensationalism over truth, is critiqued in the video. This culture is implied to contribute to instances of fraud, as the pressure to publish sensational findings can lead researchers to manipulate data. The video discusses how this culture not only affects the integrity of research but also can foster environments of bullying and unethical behavior.

💡Data Manipulation

Data manipulation involves altering or fabricating data in a research study to produce desired outcomes. The video discusses how Elizabeth Bick's findings often reveal such manipulation, particularly in image data, highlighting the significant problem it poses for scientific integrity. Examples given, like the duplicated images found in Khed Sha's work, illustrate how sophisticated techniques are used to deceive the peer review system.

💡Pattern Recognition

Pattern recognition is described as a skill Elizabeth Bick possesses, allowing her to detect repetitions or anomalies in images that might indicate fraud. The video illustrates how this ability, combined with her scientific expertise, enables her to identify manipulations that would not be obvious to others. This skill is crucial for her role as a science data image detective.

💡Nature's Uniqueness

The concept of nature's uniqueness is discussed as a fundamental principle in identifying image manipulation. Elizabeth Bick explains that in nature, no two things are identical, so duplicated or identical images in scientific papers are a red flag. This concept underlines the methodology used to spot fraud, as it goes against the natural variability expected in genuine scientific images.

💡Research Integrity

Research integrity refers to the adherence to ethical, legal, and professional standards in conducting and reporting research. The video emphasizes Elizabeth Bick's role in promoting research integrity by exposing fraudulent practices in scientific publications. Her efforts are portrayed as crucial to maintaining trust in scientific literature and ensuring that scientific advancements are based on accurate and honest findings.

💡Publishing Standards

Publishing standards are the criteria and ethical guidelines that academic journals follow to ensure the quality and integrity of the research they publish. The video criticizes the current standards for not adequately addressing image fraud and suggests that incorporating tools like Image Twin into the peer review process could strengthen these standards. The lack of action from publishers and editors in response to reports of fraud is highlighted as a significant issue needing reform.

Highlights

Elizabeth Bick is recognized for uncovering image fraud in academic papers, including work by high-profile researchers and a university president.

Bick's discoveries have led to significant repercussions, including the resignation of Stanford University's president.

Her background in microbiology and experience at Stanford laid the groundwork for her role as a science data image detective.

Bick uses both her eyes and software tools like ImageTwin and PRIC to detect duplications and manipulations in scientific images.

Software tools have enhanced the capability to catch academic fraud, suggesting their integration into peer review processes.

Bick's talent for spotting patterns aids her in identifying unnatural duplications in images, leveraging nature's inherent uniqueness.

The conversation highlights a culture in academia that may prioritize quantity and sensationalism over quality and truth.

Elizabeth Bick's investigations often start from tips about problematic lab cultures rather than specific papers.

Issues of bullying, power imbalances, and the pressure to produce results can contribute to fraudulent practices in research labs.

Bick's experience highlights the prevalence of a culture that could foster misconduct in scientific research.

Despite uncovering fraud, Bick often faces frustration due to the lack of action from publishers or editors.

A comparison between the lack of accountability in scientific publishing and consumer expectations in other industries, like automotive, illustrates the need for more responsibility in science.

The interview with Elizabeth Bick underscores the importance of integrity in scientific research and the challenges in maintaining it.

Bick's work exemplifies the critical role of vigilant oversight in the academic community to preserve the credibility of scientific literature.

The discussion encourages a reevaluation of academic culture and practices to prevent data manipulation and fraud.

Transcripts

not all heroes wear capes and in today's

video I'm talking to someone who I

regard as a hero for science her name is

Elizabeth bck and she is best known for

finding evidence of image fraud in

academic papers she was the one who

found evidence of image fraud in Mark

tessia lavine's papers he was the

president of Stanford University and off

the back of these allegations actually

ended up stepping down from his position

as president not only that but Elizabeth

Bick is also the one who found evidence

of image manipulation in Nobel Prize

winner Greg semenza's work and just

recently as I reported in my last video

he's also the one who caught out khed

sha a very senior cancer researcher at

Harvard University so let's meet the

hero of the hour Elizabeth Bick talk

here today about a lot of things that

could lead me into trouble Elizabeth

Bick I'm uh born and raised and I did my

PhD in the Netherlands uh in

microbiology so that's my background uh

I've worked 15 years at Stanford and

since 2019 I'm a full-time science data

image detective so my first question to

Elizabeth was how does she find this

evidence because to me I find it so

remarkable that somebody can simply look

at of paper and notice when things look

off it's really not that easy so I asked

her how she does it and this is what she

told me so I still use mostly my eyes

and and um in uh 2015 around that time I

did a big survey of scientific papers

just knowing how many of those would if

you would screen them how many of them

had problems and I just used my eyes so

I'm looking for duplications in papers

and in in images specifically so that

might be you know two images that are

identical um or two panels that overlap

or duplications within a panel so let's

say a cell or a blood band has been

stamped and duplicated a couple of times

so that's not good and that's usually uh

you know not not done by accident since

uh about 3 years I'm using software and

there are several packages on the market

so I'm using um um two of them image

twin and pric to to help me find these

duplications and image twin has a

database of images so you can sometimes

find duplications of an image within one

paper with another paper and this is

what happened to khed sha through the

use of software in this case image twin

Elizabeth Bick was able to find many

instances of duplicated images that were

taken from completely different papers

from different research teams that

didn't involve the original authors of

this paper and she even found evidence

of the authors taking images from

websites that sell scientific equipment

and materials being used as evidence in

the actual paper itself now Elizabeth

has caught a lot of people just using

her eyes but in this instance if she was

just using her eyes then she never would

have caught these researchers out and of

course if Elizabeth Bick who is actively

looking for these things wouldn't be

able to find them then there's no way

that a typical peer reviewer who's not

even looking for these things in the

first place would ever spot this kind of

data manipulation so software these days

makes catching academic Bad actors a lot

easier and a lot more reliable and in my

opinion it should just be built in as a

standard part of the peer review process

that whenever you submit a paper that

contains images to a journal it should

just be put through image twin because

then image Twin's Library will grow even

larger and of course it'll catch anyone

out who is trying to you know submit

something a bit dodgy but even without

software Elizabeth just always had a

talent for spotting patterns in things I

guess I have some talent for sporting

patterns and and I've always had that

I've always looked at bathroom tiles or

or floor planks and if it's a laminate

floor the planks are repetitive right

the patterns repeat right if it's a

natural wood floor the patterns are

unique so everything in nature more or

less uh you know making a generalization

here is unique two leaves uh are never

identical two rocks are always slightly

different and so if you think about

cells or tissues or or Western blots the

the patterns that you see there might be

similar but they're not supposed to be

identical so if you see identity then

that is usually not good so this point

that Elizabeth makes about nature I

think is why we find her particular

brand of academic investigation so

fascinating because unlike in my field

of Behavioral Science where typically

data fraud happens in a spreadsheet and

in a spreadsheet it's very hard to tell

whether the numbers that you're looking

at are the original true numbers or not

when it comes to image manipulation the

evidence is right there you can just see

it you can see that the two images are

exactly the same and like Elizabeth said

two things being exactly the same that

almost never happens in nature but why

do scientists do it are these people

just like inherently evil people or is

there something else going on well in my

experience as someone who's been

reporting on these things and who has a

lot of conversations and regularly talks

to people with phds and so on it seems

to be more an issue of culture while

it's not true of every single research

lab there do seem to be a worryingly

large number of labs out there that have

a very broken culture a culture that

promotes quantity over quality that

promotes sensationalism over truth

because after all those are the things

that are rewarded by the current

academic system and when I asked

Elizabeth Bick about why she decided to

look into the papers by kales sha she

said it was because she received a tip

off about the culture at khar's lab as

opposed to any specific paper that that

person was worried about so I I received

a tip um and this was not a tip as in

can you look at this particular paper I

think there's a problem it was more

there are problems in this lab there are

Corners being cut there is bullying

there is you know lack of proper storage

of things there's infection of cell

lines there's just a bunch of of

problems in this lab and I uh that this

person contacted me and and said can you

look into this that and and I'm like

well you know I I'll look into their

papers but not expecting to really find

something because you know they can be

many problems in a paper but they're not

always visible from just looking at a

paper itself and you heard Elizabeth

mention bullying there and bullying in

Academia unfortunately seems to be a lot

more common than people like to talk

about part of that bullying culture

comes out of the very harsh incentive

system that I talked about earlier but

also it comes out of the huge

disparities and power between the

principal investigator or the lead

author on a paper and the young

researchers who are doing the groundwork

uh you know I've heard from other people

as well that they've been in Labs where

the culture has been very much on

getting results and trying to make them

significant like no matter what and um

and having very high output of papers um

so do you do you think these cases of

image manipulation or data fraud are

they just a symptom of bad culture

typically typically yes I mean I've

heard that that story all too often

where people come to me and say this is

the culture in the lab it's just

bullying uh perhaps there's a lot of

people on on Visa so people who are

working in the US or in another country

with a temporary work permit and and I

think if you're in that situation which

I've been in myself then the your boss

your Pi has a lot of power over you and

so there's all these Labs that have this

culture of fear and bullying and and yes

that is where people starting to cheat

and I think this is a a story I've heard

too many times so I think it's pretty

rampant um of course there's many Labs

where that's not the case I've been very

lucky to have uh good rigorous slow

working and focusing on integrity and

focusing on on uh being very precise uh

those were the types of Supervisors I've

had throughout my career but I think a

lot of people are in different

situations unfortunately now Elizabeth

Bick posts a lot on her Twitter and on

her blog but she's expressed some

frustration online in the past when she

reports on these cases and yet nothing

seems to happen uh sometimes you you you

discover something that's wrong with

people's papers and then nothing seems

to happen off the back of it um can you

talk about some of the not sometimes

very often

unfortunate and one thing that really

hit home for me about this conversation

was when she made a comparison between

buying a car and buying scientific

literature in general the lack of

response seemed to indicate to me that a

lot of Publishers or editors just did

were not willing to to act on these

things and and it's like you know having

a problem with your new car complaining

about it with uh the dealer and then

being told like yeah just learn to live

with it we sold you your car two weeks

ago so now we're not going to take any

responsibility and as a customer of a

you know buying a car we wouldn't accept

that U but apparently in scientific

literature the editor is like you know

we published the paper it's

peer-reviewed we you know we're we're

not going to take any action and and I

think that is incredibly frustrating and

Incredibly bad for science so that was

my talk with Elizabeth Vic I hope you

guys enjoyed this interview if you did

be sure to give me a thumbs up down

below cuz it really helps me out and

subscribe if you haven't already thank

you so much for watching show Elizabeth

Vick some love in the comments and I'll

see you guys next time

bye-bye