Research misconduct scandal after research misconduct scandal has surfaced in the science world as of late. Between neuroscientist and National Institute of Health (NIH) officer Eliezer Masliah, who Minding the Campus contributor David Randall reported on in late September, and superconductivity physicist Ranga Dias, whom I reported on, news of scientific misconduct has become increasingly prominent. And it is incredibly concerning.
Both these cases highlight two major points of failure in scientific academia. The first stems from the peer-review process, which is a process in academic research publication aimed at assessing the “originality, validity, and significance” of research manuscripts to determine their eligibility for publication in a particular journal[1].
Considering that there was not one, but several papers retracted in both misconduct cases, one must wonder about the proficiency of the reviewers in the peer-review process. One would think that competent peer-reviewers would have trained eyes to spot instances of data and figure manipulation before it was even published. Yet somehow this was overlooked when involving both Masliah and Dias.
[RELATED: Ranga Dias Deals Another Blow to Scientific Integrity]
The second point of failure points directly back to the universities themselves.
As I noted in my report of the Ranga Dias case, he was found to have not only manipulated and plagiarized his publications but also around a quarter of his Washington State University Ph.D. thesis, which included identical paragraphs from a 2007 thesis. The first question that comes to mind is how his dissertation committee missed such blatant evidence of plagiarism. If Dias’ cheating behaviors had been exposed before he even graduated, any damage done in the greater scientific community could have been avoided.
Fraudulent publications such as those by Masliah and Dias not only affect the reputations of the coauthors and the public’s trust, but they also have a domino effect on all other publications based on their research. Now, there is a serious concern that every work based on these fraudulent publications is riddled with error.
I just recently wrapped up a Master’s class entitled Faith and Science, where one of our mid-semester assignments was an in-class debate aimed at arguing for or against the reciprocal relationship between Christianity and scientific practice. Within our conversation, a serious point was brought up and debated between the “for” and “against” groups: biomedical ethics. The “against” group argued that Christianity places too many limitations on scientific practice that prevent science from “spreading its research wings.” Conversely, the “for” group’s response noted that without the moral restrictions that Christianity places on science, human immorality would run science into the ground.
This is an incredibly important point to consider within current scientific practice.
Ultimately, research misconduct stems from a failure of morality and ethics. It is the point at which selfishly motivated scientists choose personal gain and prestige over the well-being of the community and the world. However, I argue, that although personal responsibility is a critical factor in this conversation, those who have been involved in the professional life of said scientist are also partially responsible.
The professors and mentors involved in the lives of science students—and, quite frankly, all students—are not simply responsible for catching, disciplining, and reporting lazy and cheating behaviors. This is the bare minimum. The best professors I ever had surpassed discipline to instill morality and a conscientious work ethic. Yes, they set high expectations for students. But they also went above and beyond to act as excellent role models, demonstrating moral character and a high ethical standard wherever they went.
Ethics needs to return to the science world, but the process needs to start from the ground up.
[RELATED: New Christian Medical School at Brigham Young University]
Everyone bears some form of responsibility in this process, ranging from students to professors to mentors. And Christian higher education might just be the antidote for the research misconduct poison.
Proverbs 12:22 states, “The Lord detests lying lips, but he delights in people who are trustworthy.” In Christian schools, cheating, plagiarizing, and fabricating are more serious offenses than simply breaking school rules. It is a strict moral standard, and as an offense to the Lord and to the Christian faith, it is considered both shameful and embarrassing behavior.
Yes, the occasional cheating student may slip by undetected, but this is incredibly rare in small Christian schools, where there is a small class size, a high level of accountability, and professors with a strict moral standard. Ultimately, Christian schools have the perfect opportunity to turn out ethically conscious and honest scientists who can change the landscape of the science world to once again become more trustworthy.
[1] “Peer review process,” BioMed Central, https://www.biomedcentral.com/getpublished/peer-review-process#:~:text=Peer%20review%20is%20the%20system,authors’%20response%20to%20the%20reviewer.
Image edited by Jared Gould using asset by Sharpshot on Adobe Stock: Asset ID#: 3474903
This article was originally published at www.mindingthecampus.org
