This Scientist catches FRAUD in Harvard and Stanford Research
Summary
TLDRIn 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
- π Elizabeth Bick is celebrated as a hero in science for her work in uncovering image fraud in academic papers.
- π 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.
- π 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.
- πβπ¨οΈ 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.
- π οΈ 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.
- π 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.
- π¨βπ¬ She advocates for incorporating image verification software into the peer review process to catch academic misconduct more efficiently.
- π« 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.
- π‘ The problems in academic research are often linked to toxic lab cultures, including bullying and the exploitation of researchers on temporary visas.
- π‘οΈ 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
π 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.
π¨ 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.
Mindmap
Keywords
π‘Image Fraud
π‘Elizabeth Bick
π‘Peer Review
π‘Software Tools
π‘Academic Culture
π‘Data Manipulation
π‘Pattern Recognition
π‘Nature's Uniqueness
π‘Research Integrity
π‘Publishing Standards
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
Browse More Related Video
Truth in Data Science | Jaya Tripathi | TEDxYouth@BHS
1.5 cr Offer in Remote Jobs | How to get Remote Jobs
The Satisfying Downfall Of Nadia (Warzone Cheater)
Cracked TOP Product based company with 5X Salary | From a Software Test Engineer to a Data Engineer!
Taylor Swift on "Lover" and haters
Microsoft Girl in the US talks about AI, DSA and life in the US π₯
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)