Two scandals at Harvard spotlight data fabrication problem in academic research

Editor's Note

Two separate incidents of data fabrication and manipulation involving Harvard University and its affiliates might be indicative of a much larger fraud problem in the scientific research world, Vox March 1 reports. The most recent of the two incidents happened at the Harvard-affiliated Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, which faced accusations of data manipulation in cancer research just two months ago.

The first case involves the Harvard Business School, of which one faculty member was accused of fabricating data in at least four published studies. The allegations surfaced after data sleuths identified inconsistencies in the published work, which led to an investigation by Harvard and subsequent legal action by the accused against both the university and the people behind the initial exposure. In both cases, retractions of published works happened, and corrections of other data were issued post-haste.

The two cases, argues Vox, highlight a broader issue within the biomedical research field, where reportedly manipulated data such as faked images are not uncommon. A study by Dutch microbiologist Elisabeth Bik, for instance, found evidence of image manipulation in 3.8% of over 20,000 biomedical papers reviewed. Despite previous awareness within the scientific community, it often takes external efforts to bring these issues to light, which could point to a lack of institutional processes for reviewing papers as well as to risks faced by individuals who expose this type of fraud.

While the impact of these unethical practices on scientific integrity, funding, and advancements—particularly in critical areas like cancer research—is complex and hard to measure, the exposure of such issues at a prestigious university such as Harvard may draw necessary public attention to the problem of research misconduct, the article concludes.