Thank you all for the amazing feedback, keep it coming! UPDATE: Francesca's rebuttal to the claims: www.francesca-v-harvard.org/ I heart comments I have seen, and reply to those KZread notifies me off. FEEDBACK: - We hear you about the animation - TOO MUCH. - Apologies for my pronunciation, I should have searched how to say the university. My bad. Lesson learned. - Do more spell checking. KEY COMMENTS: - Journal reviewers should be paid - Critics should also have critics - 'Hard sciences' are not the same - with rebuttals claiming the contrary - Peer review should be double blind - Academics should focus on lecturing not just publishing @fridavinci6177

@susampson278

10 ай бұрын

The animation is a BIG distraction

@jamesjwalsh

10 ай бұрын

Here's some feedback: I didn't understand a word you said. I'm going back to TMZ and "Married With Children" vids.

@RarebitFiends

10 ай бұрын

Keep your animators busy with a new cartoon series about the adventures of a pepo fruit with rage issues: Carnage Melon.

@stanleyklein524

9 ай бұрын

Hard sciences have (at least) one important difference: They require actual theoretical motivation. And by that, I mean theories that not only describe (behavioral science, full stop!) but also explain (serious explanation, not childish accumulation of data cherry picked to support someone's intuitions) and Predict (beyond the psychology's limit of predictive prowess ="effect present" and "effect absent") -- that is, they can support actual parametric assertions based on theory..

@lanceindependent

8 ай бұрын

Ensuring reviewers don't know the identify of authors is good when possible but not always feasible in practice. In very small areas of research, it's not hard to guess who an author is, or at least narrow it down to a few people.

She tries to financially destroy the 3 investigators who caught her fraud. This is as criminal as an armed robbery. She should be made an example for hijacking the legal system to attack the investigators with a spurious lawsuit.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Certainly questionable actions but this is all over the industry, unfortunately.

@ConstructiveMinds100

10 ай бұрын

A classic sociopath

@tomg.6881

10 ай бұрын

@@ConstructiveMinds100 Or, classic female behavior. I mean some females. ;)

@kknn523

10 ай бұрын

Now imagine that there are 10,000,000 people like her in government and business.

@RenegadeContext

10 ай бұрын

Standard behaviour I'm afraid. The world is full of frivolous lawsuits designed to shut people up

I used to work at a prestigious Cancer research Institute. One of the very “successful” researchers would always ask his technicians to give him all the control data so he could select which one to use!!

@FangKu-fp5ub

10 ай бұрын

This is the norm, almost all academia (except some hard science where you actually have to provide the data) is a giant fraud, reproducibility is 0, methods are biased, conclusions are wrong if not plainly fraudulent. But this is the reality of the publish of perish industry, researchers are forced to fake stuff just to stay afloat

@albertseabra9226

10 ай бұрын

Your comment doesn't show sny evidence of wrong doing.

@douglasb5046

10 ай бұрын

@@albertseabra9226 nudge nudge, wink wink 😂😂😂

@PBndJ

10 ай бұрын

@@albertseabra9226are you thick?

@2002honda954

8 ай бұрын

@@albertseabra9226 It does you just have to read between the lines, as in disgruntled employee.

Harvard has some integrity problem: Within 13 years, it involved economics and history. Now the problem can involve psychology.

@harishs9003

8 ай бұрын

They face no consequences

@animula6908

6 ай бұрын

I don’t think it’s limited to them. I think they get more scrutiny because if you’re looking at academic fraud, starting with prestigious schools implies that it’s ubiquitous. Or at least it’s going to gain more attention because it’s an expensive Ivy League school.

The bigger question is… how Common is this misconduct in our academic institutions?

@hilaryunachukwu9736

9 ай бұрын

Much bigger question.

@macharrington7733

9 ай бұрын

Very

@kevoreilly6557

9 ай бұрын

Hopefully they’re not so stupid in their falsification On a serious note - this is why repeatability is critical

@liarspeaksthetruth

7 ай бұрын

I worked in university administration for 5 years. Academic fraud is utterly rampant. Careers and money are on the line. The problem is there's no actual oversight other than peer review. Current academia is basically a modern take on what universities have been doing for 800 years. It's time to rethink and revamp the system, especially publishing.

@dingodog5677

6 ай бұрын

Very common. Mostly just through ignorance and poor knowledge but a lot will make stuff up to get published. It’s the worst thing an academic can do.

The real issue is that reviewers for journals are not paid. They only point out issues assuming the data analysis was handled correctly. It is unreasonable for an unpaid reviewer to spend tens of hours combing through data and replicating parts of the study when they are unpaid and have their own work to deal with. Pay them and make this a requirement.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Agreed. There are many flaws with the current process. Who do you think should pay the reviewers? Journals...

@TheQueenRulesAll

10 ай бұрын

Maybe making it a requirement for all researchers to do as many reviews as they are reviewed. Keep it as simple as possible. If anyone is found to be lying about the research, either the researcher or the reviewer, they are fined and prevented from getting any research reviewed or reviewing any research for a set period of time, maybe 6 months or a year. Like most professions, being out for any length of time can break a career. The loss must be enough to prevent most from even trying. It does sadden me that this is even an issue.

@izzyc1570

10 ай бұрын

@@TheQueenRulesAll That is one way of incentivizing more checks, but publishers like Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, etc. make millions off of unpaid authors and reviewers. Universities pay these publishers for subscriptions to their journals, but authors (professors) and reviewers (professors) are unpaid. As it is, it is academic educate to accept reviewing a paper when requested (if you turn down reviewing too many, you can get blackballed from that journal). I think putting more burden on the professors isn’t fair. Make the journals pay for better quality articles. Even if there is no intentional misconduct and data forgery, mistakes happen in coding all the time, and having a technical reviewer should be standard but is unpractical with the way things are now.

@perfectallycromulent

10 ай бұрын

not paid directly. participating in the academic publication process at all levels has been considered part of the job of a university professor, and thus their salary is partially due to this activity. you get paid for your reviewing by having your own articles reviewed by others. and when the tenure review committee sees that you are on the review board of respected journals, you are more likely to get that tenure. whether this is adequate or not is a different story, but this has been academic practice for decades, part of what professors are expected to do for their university pay.

@izzyc1570

10 ай бұрын

@@perfectallycromulent yeah but that’s the university paying, not the journal

Is it just me or KZread algorithm is giving small creators a chance? Anyways nice video, though you could reduce splashing animation and make it like readable for second.

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

Agreed on both fronts!

@Mnicolette130

10 ай бұрын

I’ve def noticed that

@trouty7947

10 ай бұрын

It seems to have gotten better at picking high quality videos relevant to your interests from small creators. Definitely found a few new channels I had no idea weren't well established!

@FOTAP97

10 ай бұрын

It’s a very interesting report which is more listenable than watchable. Appreciated in any case! 👍🏼 Sub’d.

@glorianyambok7405

10 ай бұрын

Yes there is a video about these annoying ( to me) changes in the algorithm. It's no longer about sharing channels similar to your interests. You will also notice increased pushing of KZread shorts which is designed to counter Tiktok. Personally I am irritated. I don't like it. I prefer how it was before. I am not a tiktok fan. I now prefer to look at my subscriptions to view what I like. Though from habit I land on the main feed.

She is one crystallized example of the entire academic infrastructure. It's been lost.

@doomsdaybooty1072

9 ай бұрын

Yep. Well said

@javiermesa-martinez8731

9 ай бұрын

LOL Sure bud.

Makes me think of Goodhart's Law (and the 'That every measure which becomes a target becomes a bad measure' version due to Hoskins). There are metrics to measure 'researcher productivity', and researchers are pressured to appear good with respect to these measures, and so there is temptation to game those measures: produce more papers with more significant results in less time.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Agreed.

@lanceindependent

8 ай бұрын

Yep, Goodhart's law is definitely a big factor in the incentive structure in academia at present.

This is a great video; tone down the animations in future videos and you have the ingredients for a growing KZread channel :)

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

Thank you! Yes, some other feedback had a similar recommendation and I agree. Will work on it 😁

@callum938

11 ай бұрын

Agreed was a little using every PowerPoint transition available but content was good 👍

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Not PowerPoint but I agree with your point 😁

@freejay6091

10 ай бұрын

also maybe a bit less music in general. Wel placed, its nice, but i felt it was a thriller movie, while its dead serious and necessary to actually understand what you want to explain to us. Great video! Thanks very much!

@stevewicks7410

10 ай бұрын

Prezi?@@Danny.Hatcher

I'm sorry, but "Carnage Mellon University" cracked me up. Good overall though!

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

Did I pronounce it wrong or is there another reason? Thanks! Always open to feedback and further conversation 😁

@thatcabbage1258

11 ай бұрын

​​​@@Danny.Hatcherit's pronounced carn-eh-gee instead of carnage; you may have missed the 'i' in 'Carnegie' :)

@Alan_Duval

11 ай бұрын

@@thatcabbage1258 Yes, that made me chuckle, too :D I've generally heard it pronounced car-NEE-ghee, as In Carnegie Hall in NY.

@nineteenfortyeight6762

10 ай бұрын

Car-NEG-ie most properly, but the key is 3 syllables

@MilanRegec

10 ай бұрын

Carnage Mellon, I think they should change the name :-)

What she did was par for the course in academia. The only unusual aspects are that she focused so much on the topic of dishonesty-fittingly or ironically, I can't decide-and that she was a superstar academic seeking the limelight, which is poor strategery when you've been fudging all your data. I doubt she'll have any success in her lawsuits given harvard and data colada had independently arrived at the conclusion she was faking her data; on its face it shows there was plenty suspect in her research, so her best bet is to suggest there's a big conspiracy between one of the most prestigious educational institutes in the world and three random bloggers. I wish her all the worst luck in her future endeavors.

*Break the Rules* [1:35] "How did she (Gino) fall, and fall so far?" Seems like a pretty self answering question. Gino's scientific obsession with decision making and rule breaking seems to have crossed over into her personal and professional conduct. Drank her own Cool-Aid? Gino's problem with such a successful and remunerative strategy is that the validity of her work, career and profession are almost wholly dependent upon everyone else trusting implicitly that she is following the rules.

@faithlesshound5621

10 ай бұрын

There's a literary tradition of the gamekeeper taking up poaching. In real life, I can think of Dan Ariely, the Bankman Fried family and "The Crossbow Cannibal" at the present day.

@kevoreilly6557

9 ай бұрын

Hiding in Plain Sight

Whenever there's a catastrophie in the USA, there's usually a Harvard man at the center of it.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

🤔

@BillyraycyrusIII

9 ай бұрын

Bud Light has left the chat.

@kwisin1337

7 ай бұрын

Turns out they ended at a corner!

This is rife throughout the Academy. Somehow, this nonsense needs to be pulled out, root and branch. She didn't "fall". She was revealed.

I was discussing her case with some colleagues, and they also agreed that she had done some horrible things. They expressed concern that she might win the case, though I hope not. We speculated about how she could manipulate the situation in the court, playing with the idea of how others attempted to destroy her reputation. However, regardless of the outcome, it's clear that she has lost her credibility forever.

The vast majority of people in psychology actually provide clinical services and work with people. Then there are people who study psychiatry and psychology and behavioral science, and then there are a subset of people who study absurd constructs and attempt to create gigantic arguments about human behavior on the basis of a questionnaire administered to college students. University departments tend to value the last type of researcher far more than people who do clinical work. I can think of nothing more trivial or random than her study about weather and honesty pledge be at the top or bottom of the page. But that is literally the kind of BS that these clinical psych people use as the basis for their larger arguments. And while she is doing her TED talks, there are thousands of other scientists studying psychotherapy and how to treat symptoms, etc, and that is never going to get any press at all because everybody is more fascinated by these weird mediastars and their ridiculous trifling bloviation.

As someone with a background in psych research I find it surprising that these outliers were included in the final dataset. The heteroscedasticity of the data would be apparent in the methodology section and flagged as such by any peer reviewers, I presume

With Dan Ariely as a co author and supervisor. I'd have to side with Data Colada. He is also accused of falsifying data, but he kept his job.

The idea that original research has any kind of standing has to be dispensed with. Such research papers, when finalized, should then be submitted for verification, with all the necessary detail to allow other teams to exactly copy the experiments. When reproduceable results have been achieved, you get to "publish" your work as something of meaningful value to the field of study, with extensive explanations contributed by the other teams of what they thought about experiment and the conclusions. That is much closer to the scientific method than just "have 2 friends look at it and give an OK". Which is just a guild protecting its own.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

The replication crisis in many fields of science is certainly an issue. How would you suggest we alter the review system?

I am an old man and I have just recently come to understand the age-old battle of empiricism vs rationalism. I finally understand the argument and I stand with empiricism.

Its strange to pick on this person in particular. What I saw was data manipulation of a fairly standard kind, misunderstanding of the value of ordinal data and a somewhat bizarre criticism of column headers. The presentation itself was fast. Blasting from one fact to another, never giving you time to process what was going on. In essence, the researchers method of removing outliers was assumed to be deceptive. I have no doubt that the researchers knew that dopping so would skew the results in their favour, but I'm willing to bet the entire department considered that kind of thing to be valid research. I think the row duplicate was a genuine mistake. My advice is that a log transform should be used whenever possible, removing the need to remove outliers

@KPWarrior93

Ай бұрын

why

Meanwhile, Dan Ariely keeps his job and gets to advise a TV show despite doing the exact same thing.

Haha, I can tell you had fun making the video animations with how it all flips and flops everywhere! 😊

Have you done the President of Stanford University? A freshman with the university newspaper scooped the story.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

I have written about him, and am familiar with hundreds of cases that are similar. Potential future videos 😁

I didn't understand the vitriol thrown at her but this video explains it quite well basing your work on the wrong data or making it up yourself to defend your work is wrong ...she should have been a politician, academia was not for her😂

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

Aha interesting take! Yeah, the story has so many angles. Hopefully I covered most the main points 😁

This is a problem not only with scientists, but all professions. For example, a professional engineer needs to be truthful about their results and faking them can be very bad, thus faking results can result in being fired for cause. This does not necessarily mean the underling science or technology is wrong, but it could be, and thus false data is really bad. The engineering example I saw of this was where the engineer in question had a system fault ruin the data collection of a long difficult test which he was certain what the results would be, so rather than go through all the time and effort of redoing the testing, he just made up passing test results. But, the testing was for quality control endurance testing on communication lasers, some of which in fact did not pass the test. What he did then invalidated any quality testing he did because it was unknown how much faking of results he had been doing. Needless to say, the engineer that faked the data was fired with cause.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

💯 A previous video about driving licenses in the UK shares a similar example where professional quality and developed skills are not effectively monitored.

I just stumbled upon your channel. I've decided to subscribe. Keep up the good work.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Thanks, will do!

I was in a pre-graduate psych program in university and I decided not to continue in academia when I learned that basically all psych research was horribly confounded by the practice of selecting data to support a predetermined outcome.

I've been talking about similar issues too. You got my subscription!

I HATED the video formatting on this podcast. The constant popping up and movements of words on the screen were too fast to follow or read, but also took away enough of my attention that I wasn't comprehending the audio track either.

"Carnage melon university"... that's where I'd like to study 😊

Fantastic video mate, the best I’ve seen on this Francesca Gino thing.

Great video! But this Carnegie Mellon alumnus grimaced at your pronunciation of “Carnage Mellon.” Andrew Carnegie was from the UK - you know how to pronounce Carnegie. 😅

We only here about the cases with something extra glamorous like the irony involved in this case. There are thousands of boring frauds we never get videos about. Think how scary that is. 😮

I am hoping AI, trained to detect such frauds with much available material, will be applied to the research of the past. Much cant will fall.

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

I think AI will help, but it has it's limitations.

@thorebergmann1986

10 ай бұрын

Honestly I don't think so. Do you remember a few weeks ago or so, when they said in the news that research papers created by AI used fake citations? And that the cited papers don't even exist? They said it is because the AI was "hallucinating". I mean, this could be true. But maybe there are just so many 'faked' scientifc papers out there (maybe like 20%), that it is hard to find a sensible data set to train the AI in the first place. In this sense, the AI indeed shows us more truth than we actually may want to digest at the moment und it just shows us how we humans (or at least the western scientific hemisphere) are.

@waterflows9723

9 ай бұрын

Anything created by humans is corruptable.

@mr_beezlebub3985

8 ай бұрын

I feel like AI could be used to make fraud much worse.

"Why it pays to break the rules at work and in life" 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣😵

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

😅😅

Great video!

Awesome video!

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it

Good job on the video 👍

Peer review process is broken, studies need to be reproduced. there is no alternatives

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

I agree. What would you suggest as solutions for peer review? I think the reproduction of studies is a crises all social sciences struggle with.

@nlabanok

10 ай бұрын

Agreed but would add that they are "independently" reproducible...

@drstevej2527

10 ай бұрын

That’s exactly how much of this gets exposed. Someone looked at the findings and questioned what they saw. Then others in the larger community examine the work and if no one else can replicate it or it’s inconsistent with other research then more scrutiny is warranted. Lastly there is a misconception that a published paper somehow becomes the dominant paradigm when nothing could be further from the truth. Papers are just individual works and until they are replicated examined and re-examined they remain isolated works. Given there is a risk that someone else might cite bad research in their work which can create a snowball effect in terms of questionable research being cite in otherwise legitimate research.

@kevoreilly6557

9 ай бұрын

Repeatability

I watched it once and I believed every single word. I watched it a second time, and now I don't understand almost any claim you do in the video. Honestly, as this video might blow up in the future weeks, I suggest you balance it. As one commentator already pointed out, the claims made only touch smaller details of the publications. Minor mistakes can be found in any publication as the matters involved and statistics can be really complicated nowadays. Also, even scientists do mistakes.

interesting, but hard to watch, so much useless stuff happening on the screen

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

Thanks for the feedback! In what way was it useless?

@childofaether8733

11 ай бұрын

Just too many animations with lots of text that go away in 1 second and don't let us time to read. It makes the viewer try to focus on all that text but in vain. I would suggest reducing the bloat and selecting the most relevant visuals to leave on screen for longer periods of time.

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

I agree. It was one of the things I thought about the video when watching it back after the render (~2 hours). Learning animation has been really fun, but definitely went over the top here 😆 Really appreciate the feedback, if you have any other thoughts let me know. PS: KZread doesn't notify me when you reply unless you tag me. That is why I encouraged people to go to discord, so I don't miss anything 😉

This channel is like the Coffeezilla of the academic world.

Content is good but the animations and transitions made me look away and just listen in some portions

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

Yeah. Will be working on that. Lots of feedback is similar.

0:52 "Carnage"? Seriously? Carnage. It is either CAR-neh-gee (US style) or car-NEH-gee (Scots style)--both have a hard "g" as in geek at the end. Good video otherwise. . . at least as far as I can tell; I don't have access to the original documents.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

All the documents I use are free online 😁

So if this lawsuit is on-going, wh has she supposedly fallen? Is it a case of found guilty merely on accusation, despite categorical denials. This happens to so many men. For once a woman is a victim.

Apparently she didn’t sign the honesty pledge at the top of her own papers…

Thanks for this very interesting video. I suggest that you turn the music down a little bit? For me it made it hard to hear you.

@Danny.Hatcher

8 ай бұрын

Noted! We have adjusted the editing for the videos on the channel 😁

0:53 "Carnage melon university" --> "Carnegie Mellon University"

Something I’m interested to learn more about. Hehe.

The field of psychology is going from a pseudoscience to an absolute shitshow.

@michaelshannon9169

10 ай бұрын

@@robertmayfield8746 descriptive is non-judgemental but psychology attempts to arrive at conclusions. They make studies, use data, draw conclusions. This is where it comes in for criticism as it fails to arrive at conclusions rigorous enough to be considered scientific. The conclusions they do make fall so short in terms of anything in the way of something therapeutic.

@1911Earthling

10 ай бұрын

Man I could not agree more. I have a four hundred pound sister in law who’s a psychologist who treats people with disorders but she is dying from eating. How is that possible? She is out of control and can’t see the truth. OMG I give up.

@1911Earthling

10 ай бұрын

@@robertmayfield8746 you are correct. Her weight is aggressive towards the whole family. It has taken a toll on all of us. If actual therapy existed I would be agreeable. But since we all are flawed people, including therapists, therapy doesn’t exist. You guys made all this stuff up and regurgitate it to each other until you believe it. If you tell a lie often enough people will believe it. I will say this. If highly educated people tell a lie often enough the uneducated people will believe it and not question it.

@1911Earthling

10 ай бұрын

@@robertmayfield8746 graduated from trade school.

@robertmayfield8746

10 ай бұрын

@@1911Earthling what level, what degree? years of experience?

An interesting video, but I have two minor criticisms. 1. The graphics are too tricky and obscure what is being said. 2. You need to review the text before publication - or get an editor to do so.

CARNAGE MELON HELL YEAH I'M SUBBED

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

😆😆😅 Yeah big boo boo on my part, but at least it got a giggle

English I & II at the same time? There is a teacher shortage in that subject. There are a lot of business people. After the pandemic, many people lost their job. They are learning how to start a business with the skills they know or learned during lockdown. The rise in conspiracy theories and the lack of political scientists. Coincidence, or clause and effect? If only we had more political scientists to investigate this!

Could be something as silly as misusing excell:adding data to the spreadsheets with rows with unmatched column entries . Careless, but something expected from fuzzy subject researchers.

Great work 10/10

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

I'm glad you like it

How and why the world avoid to apprehend frauds 😮 Doctors lab-rating their patients without their knowledge or consent 😮 Social aide assistants and directors stealing from poorest people 😲😳🤔🙄

[5:05] That is a data import formatting error. That's a common data entry error. [6:81] So they moved numbers around, and ignored the words? Isn't that manipulating data?

Nice summary. Lots of typos though!

Great story! I don't know if you can edit your video, but it's Carnegie Mellon, not Carnage --which has a rather nasty meaning.

@luvlyerdj93

10 ай бұрын

Carnage Melon would be a great name for a metal band

Business Schools ought not to be in universities. There’s no place for MBAs in academia.

@faithlesshound5621

10 ай бұрын

I would agree, but they bring in the Big Bucks, and that's what higher education is all about nowadays. Star professors are employed to bring in research grants from outside, and to lead teams which churn out publications in highly-regarded journals. At least they are not football coaches.

@dorianphilotheates3769

10 ай бұрын

@@faithlesshound5621 - Give it time...

10:31 "safty bill"?? Educational science indeed!

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Humans make mistakes 😁

A wise professor once told our class people perform based on how they are measured. I have never forgotten that and witnessed the bad results throughout my professional career. Think long and hard before using simple metrics to measure performance.

This is some great animation, I love the design but it feels like you ought to linger on some screens like BobbyBroccoli or LegalEagle does. Too much motion can be a bit distracting from the narration.

"Carnage-Melon University" 🤭 I am amused by little things...😅

A suggestion to add to other comments: please proof and spell check all your text. Interesting content, nonetheless!

Her work on dishonesty was a Freudian slip

"Carnage Mellon" is where Gallagher got his degree.

There are some real smart people in academics today. They all know exactly how to game the system.

Peer review is like wrestling with a loaded gun

Maybe if I'm a researcher specializing in dishonesty and I authenticity, no one will notice...

@selmahare

9 ай бұрын

Lol Spot on! It’s exactly what she did.

Carnage mellon has me rolling💀💀💀💀

@theparkerfamily7153

10 ай бұрын

Dude has no clue who andrew carnegie was.

car neh gee melon is how you say the name of the university

@verybigbrain723

11 ай бұрын

also really cool and interesting video ;-;

@Danny.Hatcher

11 ай бұрын

Ah thank you!!!! I was so confused when trying to say it 😆 Should have just used a search enguine. Lesson learned.

Can you look at the PACE trial please.

Carnage Mellon sounds about right

Good thing someone didn't "trust the science". We need more guys like that right now.

Is it that the professor is just not good with Excel (and sloppy)? It’s easy to get columns disconnected when you try to sort a data set if you’re not careful. It happens often.

@selmahare

9 ай бұрын

I believe that could be it too. But then again, wouldn’t one expect far better than sloppy work from such a renowned Harvard professor?! I believe that one should expect better from any graduate student of any university, even more so from a university professor and again one that was supposed to be so renowned, and again a Harvard one at that! Things like this make me happy about having graduated from my mid rank universities. UCL and University of Lisbon every day of the week thank you! Y’all can keep your offensively overpriced, posho Harvards and Oxfords, thank you. If that’s the kind of work that is coming out of their ranks these days I’m good.

Where exactly is "Carnage Melon" University? Is that where Gallagher went to school?

@Danny.Hatcher

9 ай бұрын

I would search the Internet for that.

Did you say "Carnage Mellon"? Lol, sorry, it's usually we Americans who get skewered for butchering pronunciations. Nice video!

Carnage-Mellon University? Let me guess. They investigate watermelon stabbings....

Publish or perish is true in academic. However, it's not a good idea to improve the quality of education. Let's stop forcing professors to publish their works and pay more attention to the class. I'm not saying what she did is good. I don’t support frauds. But nowadays, I think the whole academic movement is going in the wrong directions. To discover new knowledge, publishing paper, and conducting research is not the only way. It takes so much time. What lecturers need to focusing is their teaching. Give them enough time to upgrade their knowledge and spend more time in classrooms with students. I am a lecturer in art and design. Our focus should be improving our skills in designing, creative think, ng and so on. If you can't draw or design multimedia, what's the point of being lecturerers in this field. I know a professor in music. And her major is in piano. She can't even play piano well, so what's the point of publishing paper? She got the title because of those papers, but she can't play piano like a professional!!!! .What the uni did is push us to publish academic works and fill unnecessary forms, doing paperwork. This is a global phenomenon. I want more time to upgrade my knowledge and keep up with the new trend of technologies in the field, but I spend most of the time doing silly statistics and paperwork. It gives me a lot of questions about the real body of knowledge in my field. Okay I might be able to publish thousands of papers and research, but if I can't teach my students to be able to design, using industrial standards software, they will be so unprepared for the job market. Nowadays, I barely publish my work, and I want to focus on improving the artistic skills to teach my students. Let's get real. The classes in many unis are out-of-date. It's pedantic. It's not practical. And FYI, many uni call students "clients" instead. They lower the bar of evaluating works to attract more students. All they need is lecturers should give funds or money to uni (find more clients basically). What's about our real job? We are not a salesman. We SHOULD TEACH!

I have a hypothesis -Academia has become as navel gazing as Instagram : - 0 With much power, comes great responsibility. Absolute power, corrupts absolutely.

He definitely edited this video in MS PowerPoint

Francesca was right Data Coloada is no where as knowledgable as they think. Their mistakes were obvious to me and I am a QC guy in manufacturing. If Data Colada has the power to get people fired than fired people have the right to sue. The real problem is that no one is having a serious discussion about how to analyze data

@Danny.Hatcher

4 ай бұрын

Agreed! With AI and increasing levels of academic misconduct it is a discussion that should be happening!

What did you use to make this video?

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Research/Writing - Obsidian Video Editing - Davinci resolve Thumbnail - Affinity Photo Project Management - Morgen

It seems like intellectual narcissism.

It's sickening

What abour Dan Arielly with whom she collaborated?

@Danny.Hatcher

8 ай бұрын

That is a different story. One I am looking into 😁

@rlkinnard

8 ай бұрын

@@Danny.Hatcher Ariely seems to have gone on the straight and narrow once he got tenure. He may have been less careful earlier in his career. Data Colada deserves a Nobel Prize; the problem is that lots of studies cannot be duplicated due to their being part of the 5% that are wrong even when the investigators are doing their best.

Good documentary but I would take it easy on the flashy animation, it’s all over the place and it’s distracting.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

Agreed.

This is only the tip of the iceberg.

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

💯!! I am working on videos covering some other points. Would be great to get your thoughts! Talking about it in the discord - link in description.

@selmahare

9 ай бұрын

I believe so too. There’s a revolution coming to western academia. A lot of these big so called high rank institutions will be getting very humbled in the next few decades. It’s all going to come crashing for them soon. The relationship between corporate interest and high rank academia is what is behind this, and there will be plenty more coming to the forefront in the years coming. Just sit, watch and see.

Why not do a video on the much more far-reaching (not to mention exceedingly more interesting) case known as the Grievance Studies Affair, undertaken by Boghossian, Lindsay, and Pluckrose?

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

It is on the list of thousands of cases I have as potential videos. This was first because it was the most recent I looked into at the time 😁

thought that was loki in the thumbnail

@Danny.Hatcher

10 ай бұрын

I am not sure what you mean. Yes Harvard fraud is eluded to in the thumbnail, but the details (background/papers/lawsuit/gofundme) are in the video. Am I missing something?

Like Mark Jacobson, she will withdraw the suit or lose and probably pay the other sides costs.

You have me at “Academic Industry.” But oh man the words. But how do you measure the value of this industry? In the US we’d have to acknowledge the college football industry as well. It ain’t all papers.

The music is too loud and distracting. 😢

9:45 bear, not bare :-)

She’s obviously bored and taking the piss at this point. Well played. Yay science 🎉

please cut the music as it detracts, from your message...

The most ironic things is how most of the research focuses on ethics and means to improve honesty. Of course such a thing needs data manipulation ...