Belated SciAm update. Unsurprisingly, it's apparently still a political magazine.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
link: Michael Shermer
_
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
link: Michael Shermer
_
"Compromised science" news/opines (includes retractions, declining academic standards, pred-J, etc)
- Thread starter C C
- Start date
72% of biomedical researchers think field is facing a reproducibility crisis: survey
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/resea...nk-field-facing-reproducibility-crisis-survey
INTRO: A 2016 survey by the journal Nature put stark numbers to the scope of science’s reproducibility problems. More than 70% of researchers across STEM fields said they’d tried and failed to replicate another scientist’s findings, with 52% of respondents agreeing that there is a “significant” reproducibility crisis.
A new study has now sought to update Nature’s nearly decade-old numbers while also homing in on a specific field: biomedicine. In a survey of 1,630 biomedical researchers from around the world, including 819 who work in clinical research, 72% of respondents agreed that the field is facing a reproducibility crisis.
What’s more, 62% of the researchers blamed a culture of “publish or perish” for the crisis, with the vast majority citing little available funding to replicate findings and just 16% saying their institution had procedures to improve research reproducibility...
_
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/resea...nk-field-facing-reproducibility-crisis-survey
INTRO: A 2016 survey by the journal Nature put stark numbers to the scope of science’s reproducibility problems. More than 70% of researchers across STEM fields said they’d tried and failed to replicate another scientist’s findings, with 52% of respondents agreeing that there is a “significant” reproducibility crisis.
A new study has now sought to update Nature’s nearly decade-old numbers while also homing in on a specific field: biomedicine. In a survey of 1,630 biomedical researchers from around the world, including 819 who work in clinical research, 72% of respondents agreed that the field is facing a reproducibility crisis.
What’s more, 62% of the researchers blamed a culture of “publish or perish” for the crisis, with the vast majority citing little available funding to replicate findings and just 16% saying their institution had procedures to improve research reproducibility...
_
Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment 50 years later (documentary)
https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/11/revisting-the-stanford-prison-experiment-50-years-later/
INTRO: In 1971, Stanford University psychologist Philip Zimbardo conducted a notorious experiment in which he randomly divided college students into two groups, guards and prisoners, and set them loose in a simulated prison environment for six days, documenting the guards' descent into brutality. His findings caused a media sensation and a lot of subsequent criticism about the ethics and methodology employed in the study.
Zimbardo died last month at 91, but his controversial legacy continues to resonate some 50 years later with The Stanford Prison Experiment: Unlocking the Truth, a new documentary from National Geographic... (MORE - details)
LINK: Official Trailer
https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/11/revisting-the-stanford-prison-experiment-50-years-later/
INTRO: In 1971, Stanford University psychologist Philip Zimbardo conducted a notorious experiment in which he randomly divided college students into two groups, guards and prisoners, and set them loose in a simulated prison environment for six days, documenting the guards' descent into brutality. His findings caused a media sensation and a lot of subsequent criticism about the ethics and methodology employed in the study.
Zimbardo died last month at 91, but his controversial legacy continues to resonate some 50 years later with The Stanford Prison Experiment: Unlocking the Truth, a new documentary from National Geographic... (MORE - details)
LINK: Official Trailer
eLife won’t get an impact factor, says Clarivate
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/11/13/elife-wont-get-an-impact-factor-says-clarivate/
Clarivate, the data company for scholarly publications, has decided to continue indexing some content from eLife in Web of Science, after reevaluating the open-access biology journal’s unusual practice of publishing articles without accepting or rejecting them. The journal will not receive an Impact Factor...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retraction Watch is hiring! Two journalism jobs available
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/11/12/retraction-watch-is-hiring-two-journalism-jobs-available/
Thanks to generous support from the WoodNext Foundation and ongoing support from individual donors, as well as revenue from journalism partnerships and speaking fees, Retraction Watch is hiring for two roles: managing editor and staff reporter...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
‘All the red flags’: Scientific Reports retracts paper sleuths called out in open letter
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/11...acts-paper-sleuths-called-out-in-open-letter/
Scientific Reports, a Springer Nature title, has retracted an article a group of sleuths described as “a kind of case study of all the red flags for fraud that we look for” in an open letter to the publisher’s head of research integrity...
_
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/11/13/elife-wont-get-an-impact-factor-says-clarivate/
Clarivate, the data company for scholarly publications, has decided to continue indexing some content from eLife in Web of Science, after reevaluating the open-access biology journal’s unusual practice of publishing articles without accepting or rejecting them. The journal will not receive an Impact Factor...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retraction Watch is hiring! Two journalism jobs available
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/11/12/retraction-watch-is-hiring-two-journalism-jobs-available/
Thanks to generous support from the WoodNext Foundation and ongoing support from individual donors, as well as revenue from journalism partnerships and speaking fees, Retraction Watch is hiring for two roles: managing editor and staff reporter...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
‘All the red flags’: Scientific Reports retracts paper sleuths called out in open letter
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/11...acts-paper-sleuths-called-out-in-open-letter/
Scientific Reports, a Springer Nature title, has retracted an article a group of sleuths described as “a kind of case study of all the red flags for fraud that we look for” in an open letter to the publisher’s head of research integrity...
_
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
The great AI witch hunt: Reviewers’ perception and (Mis)conception of generative AI in research writing
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882124000550
ABSTRACT: Generative AI (GenAI) use in research writing is growing fast. However, it is unclear how peer reviewers recognize or misjudge AI-augmented manuscripts. To investigate the impact of AI-augmented writing on peer reviews, we conducted a snippet-based online survey with 17 peer reviewers from top-tier HCI conferences.
Our findings indicate that while AI-augmented writing improves readability, language diversity, and informativeness, it often lacks research details and reflective insights from authors. Reviewers consistently struggled to distinguish between human and AI-augmented writing but their judgements remained consistent. They noted the loss of a “human touch” and subjective expressions in AI-augmented writing.
Based on our findings, we advocate for reviewer guidelines that promote impartial evaluations of submissions, regardless of any personal biases towards GenAI. The quality of the research itself should remain a priority in reviews, regardless of any preconceived notions about the tools used to create it. We emphasize that researchers must maintain their authorship and control over the writing process, even when using GenAI's assistance.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Science communication will benefit from research integrity standards
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-03586-w
EXCERPTS: “Twenty seconds, professor, and no long words.” This is what a BBC producer once told Ian Fells, a chemical engineer at Newcastle University, UK, shortly before Fells was due to appear on a live broadcast. It was more than 30 years ago, at a time when few researchers were trained in how to condense science into sound bites, while staying true to the accuracy of their message. Today, that challenge could be even bigger. The smartphone makes every researcher a potential writer, audio producer or broadcaster...
[...] In a report published last month by the League of European Research Universities (LERU), a network of 24 institutions, Morgan proposes that public-facing science-communication work should adhere to the same research-integrity principles that are used for scholarly publications...
[...] The idea deserves more attention from universities, companies and campaigning organizations — all of which are now much more involved in science communication than at any time in the past. It might not work in all contexts and there will be challenges to its implementation, but the concept should be discussed more widely...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BHU revokes Dalit Professor’s PhD over plagiarism allegations, sparking accusations of bias
https://en.themooknayak.com/dalit-n...rism-allegations-sparking-accusations-of-bias
EXCERPTS: The case, which has stirred debate across academic circles, brings renewed attention to allegations of bias and discrimination faced by scholars from marginalized communities in prestigious institutions like BHU. [...] In his defense, Dr. Sonkar argued that he is being targeted due to his caste background, emphasizing that the plagiarism regulations were established in 2018, eight years after he completed his PhD in 2010. [...] Despite the revocation, BHU has allowed Dr. Sonkar to retain his post as Assistant Professor and continue receiving other employment benefits...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bad science as genre fiction: I think there’s a lot to be said for this analogy!
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/11/08/bad-science-as-genre-fiction/
INTRO: I came across this blog comment from a couple years ago saying that, whatever was going on in the head of Brian “Pizzagate” Wansink when he wrote up those papers with the fake data, in any case his papers papers are not to be believed; they’re a sort of genre fiction.
I like this idea, not just the bad science it’s false (hence “fiction,” as in psychologist Stuart Ritchie’s recent book “Science Fictions”), but also that it’s genre fiction; that is, it’s written to a certain pattern, to fulfill certain expectations and be published in certain venues...
_
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882124000550
ABSTRACT: Generative AI (GenAI) use in research writing is growing fast. However, it is unclear how peer reviewers recognize or misjudge AI-augmented manuscripts. To investigate the impact of AI-augmented writing on peer reviews, we conducted a snippet-based online survey with 17 peer reviewers from top-tier HCI conferences.
Our findings indicate that while AI-augmented writing improves readability, language diversity, and informativeness, it often lacks research details and reflective insights from authors. Reviewers consistently struggled to distinguish between human and AI-augmented writing but their judgements remained consistent. They noted the loss of a “human touch” and subjective expressions in AI-augmented writing.
Based on our findings, we advocate for reviewer guidelines that promote impartial evaluations of submissions, regardless of any personal biases towards GenAI. The quality of the research itself should remain a priority in reviews, regardless of any preconceived notions about the tools used to create it. We emphasize that researchers must maintain their authorship and control over the writing process, even when using GenAI's assistance.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Science communication will benefit from research integrity standards
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-03586-w
EXCERPTS: “Twenty seconds, professor, and no long words.” This is what a BBC producer once told Ian Fells, a chemical engineer at Newcastle University, UK, shortly before Fells was due to appear on a live broadcast. It was more than 30 years ago, at a time when few researchers were trained in how to condense science into sound bites, while staying true to the accuracy of their message. Today, that challenge could be even bigger. The smartphone makes every researcher a potential writer, audio producer or broadcaster...
[...] In a report published last month by the League of European Research Universities (LERU), a network of 24 institutions, Morgan proposes that public-facing science-communication work should adhere to the same research-integrity principles that are used for scholarly publications...
[...] The idea deserves more attention from universities, companies and campaigning organizations — all of which are now much more involved in science communication than at any time in the past. It might not work in all contexts and there will be challenges to its implementation, but the concept should be discussed more widely...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BHU revokes Dalit Professor’s PhD over plagiarism allegations, sparking accusations of bias
https://en.themooknayak.com/dalit-n...rism-allegations-sparking-accusations-of-bias
EXCERPTS: The case, which has stirred debate across academic circles, brings renewed attention to allegations of bias and discrimination faced by scholars from marginalized communities in prestigious institutions like BHU. [...] In his defense, Dr. Sonkar argued that he is being targeted due to his caste background, emphasizing that the plagiarism regulations were established in 2018, eight years after he completed his PhD in 2010. [...] Despite the revocation, BHU has allowed Dr. Sonkar to retain his post as Assistant Professor and continue receiving other employment benefits...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bad science as genre fiction: I think there’s a lot to be said for this analogy!
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/11/08/bad-science-as-genre-fiction/
INTRO: I came across this blog comment from a couple years ago saying that, whatever was going on in the head of Brian “Pizzagate” Wansink when he wrote up those papers with the fake data, in any case his papers papers are not to be believed; they’re a sort of genre fiction.
I like this idea, not just the bad science it’s false (hence “fiction,” as in psychologist Stuart Ritchie’s recent book “Science Fictions”), but also that it’s genre fiction; that is, it’s written to a certain pattern, to fulfill certain expectations and be published in certain venues...
_
As you already probably know, the following being what ultimately transpired with respect to the incident addressed here:
https://www.sciforums.com/threads/c...emic-standards-pred-j-etc.165981/post-3741152
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
How Scientific American's departing editor helped degrade science
https://reason.com/2024/11/18/how-scientific-americans-departing-editor-helped-degrade-science/
When magazines like Scientific American are run by ideologues producing biased dreck, it only makes it more difficult to defend the institution of science itself...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
(Jerry Coyne) John Horgan defends Scientific American, its editor, and its colonization by progressive ideology
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2024...r-and-its-infusion-with-progressive-ideology/
EXCERPTS: I’ve written a fair number of posts about science writer John Horgan over the years, and also pointed out posts in which others took Horgan to task for his miguided views or even lack of understanding of the science he wrote about. [...] First, Horgan here conflates the practice of science itself with the presentation of science in magazines like Scientific American.
Yes, the actual doing of science should, as far as possible, be politically neutral, and so should articles published in scientific journals. (Sadly, the latter hope is now repeatedly violated.) The ideological erosion of biology, as Luana and I called our paper in Skeptical Inquirer, has led to the loss of trust in biology and in journals themselves; and the same is happening in all STEM fields. You wouldn’t think that math could go woke, for instance, but it has, and medical education has long been colonized by ideology, to the point where it endangers the health of Americans...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
(Nov 15) 'Scientific American' editor resigns after comments about Trump supporters went viral
https://www.npr.org/2024/11/15/nx-s...er-comments-about-trump-supporters-went-viral
In messages on Bluesky, which were later deleted, Helmuth referred to some of Trump's supporters as "the meanest, dumbest, most bigoted" individuals celebrating his election night victory over Vice President Harris. She also expressed regret to younger voters, stating that her generation is "so full of f****** fascists."
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
(2021) Scientific American goes woke - Michael Shermer
https://michaelshermer.substack.com/p/scientific-american-goes-woke
EXCERPTS: In April of 2001 I began my monthly Skeptic column at Scientific American, the longest continuously published magazine in the country dating back to 1845. [...] Alas, my streak ended in January of 2019 after a run of 214 essays. Since then, I have received many queries about why my column ended and, more generally, about what has happened over at Scientific American, which historically focused primarily on science, technology, engineering and medicine (STEM), but now appears to be turning to social justice issues...Shortly after the December 2018 column I was given my walking papers, but was allowed one more farewell column in January, 2019...
_
https://www.sciforums.com/threads/c...emic-standards-pred-j-etc.165981/post-3741152
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
How Scientific American's departing editor helped degrade science
https://reason.com/2024/11/18/how-scientific-americans-departing-editor-helped-degrade-science/
When magazines like Scientific American are run by ideologues producing biased dreck, it only makes it more difficult to defend the institution of science itself...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
(Jerry Coyne) John Horgan defends Scientific American, its editor, and its colonization by progressive ideology
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2024...r-and-its-infusion-with-progressive-ideology/
EXCERPTS: I’ve written a fair number of posts about science writer John Horgan over the years, and also pointed out posts in which others took Horgan to task for his miguided views or even lack of understanding of the science he wrote about. [...] First, Horgan here conflates the practice of science itself with the presentation of science in magazines like Scientific American.
Yes, the actual doing of science should, as far as possible, be politically neutral, and so should articles published in scientific journals. (Sadly, the latter hope is now repeatedly violated.) The ideological erosion of biology, as Luana and I called our paper in Skeptical Inquirer, has led to the loss of trust in biology and in journals themselves; and the same is happening in all STEM fields. You wouldn’t think that math could go woke, for instance, but it has, and medical education has long been colonized by ideology, to the point where it endangers the health of Americans...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
(Nov 15) 'Scientific American' editor resigns after comments about Trump supporters went viral
https://www.npr.org/2024/11/15/nx-s...er-comments-about-trump-supporters-went-viral
In messages on Bluesky, which were later deleted, Helmuth referred to some of Trump's supporters as "the meanest, dumbest, most bigoted" individuals celebrating his election night victory over Vice President Harris. She also expressed regret to younger voters, stating that her generation is "so full of f****** fascists."
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
(2021) Scientific American goes woke - Michael Shermer
https://michaelshermer.substack.com/p/scientific-american-goes-woke
EXCERPTS: In April of 2001 I began my monthly Skeptic column at Scientific American, the longest continuously published magazine in the country dating back to 1845. [...] Alas, my streak ended in January of 2019 after a run of 214 essays. Since then, I have received many queries about why my column ended and, more generally, about what has happened over at Scientific American, which historically focused primarily on science, technology, engineering and medicine (STEM), but now appears to be turning to social justice issues...Shortly after the December 2018 column I was given my walking papers, but was allowed one more farewell column in January, 2019...
_
Last edited:
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
I haven’t bought a copy of Scientific American since I retired over a decade ago ( I used to buy it at airports for long haul flights on business) but it certainly sounds as if it has lost its way under this most recent editor. Probably a very good thing she has resigned.
Let us hope the board, or the trustees, or whatever supervisory body the magazine has got, will appoint someone with a passion for science and not social justice. As some of these commentators point out, science is already seen as left wing by the anti-intellectual, Trumpie idiots now in the ascendancy. Overt political bias in what should be, and was, a serious science magazine can only make that worse.
This Horgan guy sounds ghastly, by the way: one of these horrible cultural relativists that claims because science does not take place in a political vacuum, therefore it is somehow OK to politicise it deliberately. What a prick!