Harvard scientist who studies dishonesty accused of fabricating data

Pants on fire! Harvard behavioral scientist who studies dishonesty is accused of fabricating data in multiple research papers

• Harvard Business School scholar Francesca Gino has been placed on leave
• She stands accused of fabricating data in several studies on honesty
• Now her own research partner is reviewing their studies for signs of fraud 

A Harvard behavioral scientist who studies dishonesty has been accused of fabricating data in research papers that she co-authored. 

Harvard Business School professor Francesca Gino is currently on administrative leave, after explosive allegations emerged challenging the credibility of her research.

In a blog post earlier this month, a trio of data researchers presented what they said was evidence of academic fraud in four studies co-authored by Gino, noting that they also ‘believe that many more Gino-authored papers contain fake data’.

Gino was a rising star at Harvard, and her behavioral research studies relating to cheating, lying and dishonesty received widespread media coverage over the past decade.

But questions about her work first emerged regarding a 2012 study she co-authored, which purported to show that making people sign an honesty pledge at the beginning of a form, rather than the end, increases honest responses.

Harvard Business School professor Francesca Gino is currently on administrative leave, after explosive allegations emerged challenging the credibility of her research

That study was retracted in 2021 over apparent data fabrication by a different researcher who worked on the project, which cited three separate lab experiments to draw its conclusion.

However, data scientists Uri Simonsohn, Joseph Simmons, and Leif Nelson allege that the data fabrication in the study was deeper than originally suspected, and also implicated Gino. 

‘That’s right: Two different people independently faked data for two different studies in a paper about dishonesty,’ the trio wrote on their blog DataColada, where they published the new evidence supporting their allegations.

Gino did not immediately respond to a request for comment from DailyMail.com on Saturday afternoon. 

The three scientists published their concerns a day after the Chronicle of Higher Education reported on June 16 that Gino had been placed on administrative leave, amid an internal investigation at Harvard into the validity of her research.

One of Gino’s co-authors on the 2012 research paper told The Chronicle that Harvard had informed him that the study Gino oversaw for the article appeared to include fabricated results. 

Gino was a rising star at Harvard, and her behavioral research studies relating to cheating, lying and dishonesty received widespread media coverage over the past decade

Gino joined the Harvard Business School faculty in 2010, after holding positions at the University of North Carolina and Carnegie Mellon University. 

She won awards and fawning media coverage for her trendy behavioral science research, which purported to reveal insights about how to subtly influence people’s choices and behavior without them realizing.

But now, Gino’s frequent research partner Maurice Schweitzer has spoken out, voicing fears that he himself was manipulated and conned in their work together.

Schweitzer, a behavioral scientist at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, told the New York Times he is now carefully reviewing the eight papers he co-authored with Gino for any indications of fraud.

He said that the allegations against Gino were causing ‘reverberations in the academic community’ because she is someone with ‘so many collaborators, so many articles, who is really a leading scholar in the field.’ 

The 2012 paper was based on three separate behavioral experiments, including one overseen by Gino that asked subjects to complete a worksheet with 20 puzzles, promising them $1 for each correctly solved puzzle.

Gino’s frequent research partner Maurice Schweitzer says he is now carefully reviewing the eight papers he co-authored with Gino for any indications of fraud

The participants were then asked to fill out a form asking them how much money they earned from solving the puzzles, and were led to believe that lying on the form would be undetectable, when in fact the researchers could verify the number of puzzles solved.

The study found participants were more likely to report their puzzle income accurately when they were presented with an honesty pledge at the top of the form, rather than the bottom, where such attestations usually appear on tax returns.

In their DataColada blog post, the trio of scientists analyzed data from the experiment that was posted online, finding that metadata in an Excel file indicated the results had been tampered with in a way that bolstered the study’s conclusion. 

The same scientists in 2021 exposed apparent data fabrication in a separate study conducted for the article, which relied on data provided by an insurance company.

The article was retracted by editors of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, where it had first appeared, following the 2021 blog post. 

Source: Read Full Article