It's Over - Gino vs Harvard Fake Data Scandal
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- My Website: petejudo.com
Follow me:
Behavioral Science Instagram: @petejudoofficial
Instagram: @petejudo
Twitter: @petejudo
LinkedIn: Peter Judodihardjo
Good tools I actually use:
Shortform: www.Shortform....
Ground News: ground.news/Pete
Slight correction. Her lawsuit against Data Colada has been dismissed. However, some causes of action in the lawsuit remain against Harvard. Per the Crimson: “Still, Joun allowed one key plank of the lawsuit to proceed: Gino’s claim that Harvard breached its contract with her by subjecting her to disciplinary measures in violation of its own disciplinary and tenure policies.” Also, Harvard did not move to dismiss the Title IX claims of gender discrimination, so those will proceed for now as well. Thank you to Todd on LinkedIn for pointing that out.
all bs. she committed academic fraud. she has no ground , she should be fired!
i wish you'd cover peter singer's wacko "the journal of controversial ideas", it literally promotes eugenic policies around unaliving already born children with conditions most healthcare professionals consider manageable and publishes articles on transracialism and other wacko stuff.
as a vegan, adolf and peter are the two I'm least proud to call fellow vegans. never let a vegan take a holier than though attitude, anybody for that matter.
Unbelievable. Apparently screaming you fired me because I'm a woman is the last resort of an academic con artist.
well of course look at their dean of college as she was also found guilty of plagiarism. Claudine Gray i think he name was. Probably a study to show that networking is a male activity and since we know all patriarchal activities make you feel dirty there you go. Feminism ay its finest.
Ok so Haaaarvaaard, hired a women, just to treat them vexatiously? Ya ok. Pull out the Title 9 woke card. What a piece of shit. Second, fuck Harvard. These U.S. Ivey's are a crock of shit at the undergraduate level. I know some employer's who will not even hire from Harrrrrrrrrvaaaard.
Let me get this straight. She cheats, gets caught, then wants $25 million? What a piece of work.
And failed.
It was just a big number she pulled from thin air
@@SouthernIgthe fact that she had the audacity to file and even has fan girls cheering her
That is what happens when you ostracize anyone from critizising women. Women like her live in a world of toxic positivity and label any criticism some sort of phobia.
But she is woman and should not be held to account for anything. Anyone who says otherwise is a MISOGYNIST.
The Judge's ruling made an important point. Science needs to be freely debated in public, and lawsuits that try to shut down that debate need to pass an extremely high bar. Which was not even close here. The Data Colada people did a great job of being fair and through.
Thorough*
Do you know if she will have to pay Data Colada's legal costs.
The Memorandum Opinion I just read states that several breach of contract claims against Harvard were not dismissed. It is dated Sept. 11, 2024. Have they since been dismissed?
Obviously she has no defamation case. She defamed these researchers, not vice versa.
FYI The lawsuit is not completely dismissed. It's still going forward against Harvard for breach of contract. Having said that people have a right to the courts and if they feel defamed, wrong or not, they have a right to sue and a judge or jury will decide.
@@jvanek8512 anyone with a legitimate grievance has the right to seek relief in court. When you know you're wrong, and try to game the courts to profit from it/blacken the names of those who have identified your calumny - that's malicious manipulation of the system that results in **legitimate cases having to wait longer for access to the justice system. While one is not lawfully enjoined from maliciously abusing the public system, and therefore has the legal privilege of doing so, one has no moral "right" to do so... :(
I hope there are criminal charges. She showed she was willing to have innocent people take the fall and be ruined. Imagine the number of papers and grants she was on committee for that challenged her work and her influence denied the funding or publication. So many people affected.
It would be hilarious if she herself were slapped with defamation for throwing that colleague under the bus.
Agree 100%. Given the outsize harm to others that a cornered sociopath causes, our legal code based on uniform treatment under the law is not fair. A handicap system of some kind, say via judicial discretion, might address the uneven field. Very glad the speaker emphasizes Data Coloda have lost even while winning.
Doubt it.
@@Anne_Onymousthere may be something due to grant money. Because she defrauded the American populous by fabricating data (this has happened before)
@@Anne_Onymous White collar crime. Complicated white collar crime. Court costs at the worst.
At least Gino provided a new case to study for Behavioral Science ... right?
Excellent point!
wasnt she awared the medal for Miss Behavioral Science 2024?
Intelligent comment.
@@IvarDaigon Just the gold medal for Mental Gymnastics, an offshoot.
Not just a new case... This is something else. I mean, who master-minded this in the first place, and what was their ultimate goal?
I hope Data Colada is able to recover costs from Gino.
THE BIGGEST SCANDAL OF ALL: the US is the only developed country without "loser pays".
ALL TV lawyer ads would disappear overnight
They won't. But not having to waste even more money on the stupid suit is already a big win.
In theory, they can sue to recover their costs -- but they won't get the costs of suing to recover their costs (unless they sue to recover the costs of suing to recover their costs...)
I hope Gino can never find another teaching position. But, perhaps, maybe she can learn honesty if allowed to teach a kindergarten or first-grade science or social studies class? 🤔
@@WayneLynch69 Loser pays has its own downsides. I prefer system when judge can award the payment, rather than automatic loser pays
The peer review system is broken and will remain that way as long as the following exists.
1. "Publish or Perish"
Colleges using people's bibliographies as the main metric for tenure
In most Universities it's basically irrelevant how good you are at teaching or how knowledgeable you are in your field, the only thing that matters is how many times you've been published.
This provides a very strong motivation to fake research.
2. Treating published research as "proven".
That's not how the process works.
The peer review is mainly aimed at checking to see if the submitted paper is written well enough to be understandable and contains enough information to REPEAT the experiment.
Peer review journals do not , and have never validated research.
That happens *after* the paper is published and even though the large majority of published papers are eventually proven wrong the academic world keeps acting like
"published" = "proven".
These two attitudes in the academic world have left the door wide open for fraud.
Completely agreed, especially on #2. Laypeople acting as if the conclusions of a peer reviewed article are a proven fact is facepalm-worthy, but academics doing the same is plainly laughable. And the more surprising the conclusions, the more they should be scrutinized.
Knudging data programmatically in order to support a pre-existing hypothesis in a way that won't be detected is very easy if you know a little bit of programming and statistics. I bet it is quite common, because there is a massive incentive for researchers to publish positive results and a very low likelihood that they will get caught if they cheat.
@@Frostbiker Nobody gets tenured for repeating an experiment to prove/disprove a paper.
So in some fields only a tiny percentage of experiments are ever repeated.
In Behavioral Economics it's almost never.
@@FrostbikerThe biggest issue for lay people is without personal expertise they are presented studies as factual information by our MSM. I have yet to see a disclaimer in MSM that a study is only preliminary and has not been confirmed by rigorous independent confirmation. These studies are presented as truth and people wonder why you have movements like MAGA who believe nothing but what they choose to believe.
💯 Bingo! I fully agree. But further more, I would add, even the peer review itself and publishing is mostly fake and based on connections, politics and the like.
Nailed it!
To be more factual, the case was only partially dismissed. The case against Harvard will still go to trial on counts related to breach of contract. But Harvard has resources to fight it, unlike Data Colada.
And even if not written into any contract, misconduct can often negate same.
@@UncleKennysPlace When I was an undergrad at Trinity College, Cambridge in the '70s, our oldest don passed away. As a young historian, he had written a brilliant book and was offered life tenure. At which point he never did another stroke of work, living it up in College rooms and eating at High Table. By all accounts he flew around the country in an autogyro giving hellfire sermons at public schools and buggering the choirboys. And his contract was such that there wasn't a thing the College could do about it. Apparently this became an infamous case amongst university administrations, and the idea of tenure being built on honour and trust has given way to tighter arrangements. My guess is that Harvard will have given themselves an exit route for situations such as this.
She's also suing because the dean did not give her a chance to respond to the report before the dismissal. There is an outlined process for these types of issues and are was supposed to have the ability to defend her case at Harvard. So that's why she might be successful in her suit against Harvard. We'll see.
@@tullochgorum6323"he flew around the country in an autogyro giving hellfire sermons and buggering choirboys" - ah the 1970s, that golden era!
@@AndyJarman This was LONG before the 70s. That's when he died, in his late 90s. So we're talking 1920s and 30s. Even in the benighted 70s buggering choirboys was seen as bad form, old chap...
It is a broader problem with perverse incentives in academia. For many tenure-track folks, it is publish or perish. And the peer-reviewed journals will NOT publish a non-result. So, you somehow have to find something "novel" to study. Then, you have to get data for it. And if your data doesn't find p < 0.05, then you've wasted a year of your tenure clock because the academic peer-review journals won't publish it.
So you're strongly incentivized to "massage" the data. Get rid of certain data points to make your results statistically significant and get that publication. You'll justify it by calling those points "anomalies" or "outliers" in the data.
So yes, she screwed up. But this data massaging, and even data fraud, is MUCH more common than people realize. More retractions are being issued for researchers and academics, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. The journals and universities need to absorb some of the blame for the bad incentives they've created.
Yeah it’s a real shame there isn’t more funding/credit for showing things that don’t exist. Everyone wants to uncover some new link, more attention needs to be given for discrediting potential links too.
The gall of her filing suit is rich. The analysis is by those who uncovered the data manipulation was pretty solid and well documented.
@@gregoryf9299 There are some cases like studying the link between video games and violent crimes where the lack of corelation is the point of the study.
History in academia is just completely cooked because of this. There’s hardly ever any new information that’s going to completely change what’s known about, oh, say, Abraham Lincoln. New discoveries tend to just add detail to what is already known. Thus, history is “boring” and most modern historians are critical theorists with wild hot takes, looking at history through different “lenses.”
The second edge of the knife is that people are brainwashed into thinking "peer-reviewed" must mean the research is incontrovertible, when all too often, it's all corrupt and full of lies.
@@AbsentMinded619 I could give you hundreds of hours of video to watch that would prove to you the truth about a particular time in history. The problem is people have been absolutely BRAINWASHED to reject anything that contradicts the taught (fraudulent) narrative.
Most of what the West learns about WW2 is - lies, deception, war propaganda, Hollywood fakery. There's even more that's simply left out of the record, rather than lied about, yet they'll try to bury you for mentioning it.
Remember this phrase. Winners write history. NOWHERE in there does it say they write it truthfully, accurately, etc.
... believe it - there are a THOUSAND more Francesca Gino's out there near YOU
And this is based on your opinion presumably...or have you 'done your research' 🥱
You sound like one @@lindsaywootten9127
Guess who just got a 10 million dollar grant to stop free speech online = NZs ex PM ( I am the soul source of truth , All other news is fake news ) That one ? Ardern , WEFs head of "The world youth socialists movement"
@@lindsaywootten9127 How else do you think they come up with the data claiming that mutilating and chemically castrating children's healthy bodies due to a mental condition is beneficial?
Hi, did the supervisors of the original PHD candidates who tried to get her to drop it face any consequences? Same for the ‘peers’ who reviewed the papers based on the fraudulent data?
peer reviewing is just another way to gain some notoriety.
Does that tell you something about peer-reviewed science. It's all a scam.
The peer reviewers are almost certainly shielded from penalty. Most people don't go into peer review assuming fraud.
@@pierrecurie hi, given that their reputation is on the line along with the author perhaps they should. I certainly would look at any historical reviews they have done with askance and any future papers they put their stamp of approval to should be looked at as suspect. A PHD candidate discovered the issue initially, not a much more experienced researcher. My more cynical side wonders if it had been discovered/suspected by others who wouldn’t take it any further. After all look at the PHD candidates supervisors response when she brought it to them. Shameful behaviour.
@@H2Dwoat Oh, are we all finally admitting the emperor has no clothes then? Yes, academia is a farce. Fin.
4:30 "Fraud of this magnitude is quite rare" if it's even being committed by a 'superstar' Harvard professor, then I guarantee you it isn't. If Gino had attempted to cover her tracks even a little bit, then this would never have been detected.
Since fraud this obvious took this long to catch, I will bet that the rest of Academia is absolutely riddled with it.
Exactly - the only way you get to the top is by being outstanding and most people achieve this by cheating.
I would imagine frauds don't like to put in any effort whatsoever.
Spot on! You are very right. Only the most deliberate fraud is called to our attention.
Be easy to fix, tie the majority of the money to recreation.
And then make it a huge jail sentence if any manipulation happens
@passerby4507 Then I recommend you read up more on the topic. Fraudsters have put in some serious effort historically.
I don't care if a study is conducted in a community college, a researcher's personal integrity should prevent fabrication of the results. How much did Gino earn from speaking fees and status as a result of the fabrication. Charlie Munger said, "Show me the incentive structure and I give you the outcome".
Mugner defines people who don't comply with the incentive structure as idiots not worth thinking about, which makes his observation a tautology.
@@afterthesmash Some people would have the opinion that not taking a beneficial incentive is idiotic. A majority of people dont care about integrity when it comes to lining their wallet.
I went to school with someone who found that a large scale, multi-year, study was not following certain laws around privacy and were ignoring rules about using participants who were minors. They met so much resistance that the school finally found a reason to kick him out, and on the very last term of his master's program. The lawsuit that resulted also resulted in six core faculty getting fired and they were ultimately allowed to graduate with 2 fewer courses than were required by their program.
I can't believe this sort of stuff happens either, but it does. This is why I try to warn folks not to mythologize their professors, regardless of the work they've done. They are doing a job, you are a student, and they are human. Thinking of people who have power over you as heroes has a very poor history to it. I would advise against it.
you can honestly compare this to church
they're acting like it's a religion in someways do not question us
A dishonest Harvard professor?
Shocking!
The sarcasm is strong with this one.
Harvard B-school professor? Shocking!😅
LOL
The third (?) recent female at Harvard guilty of plagiarism? Wow. Just shows how bad DEI has become.
What, is this a thing? You say this like it's a common occurrence.
It amazes me how many so-called scientists and researchers publish “research” that any experimental research and statistics graduate student could tell you is neither valid nor reliable. And tell you so before finishing their read of the article presenting the research. The quality of Ph.D. programs must be mightily eroding with courses in experimental research design, methodology, and statistics no longer mandated. If you don’t know the difference between anova and chi square or what .01 and .05 mean, you should not be plaguing society with pseudo-research. Or you get this fiasco. Besides, on its face when did “feeling dirty” become a scientific concept? In any discipline? Keep at it, Data Colada.
"Feeling dirty" is not an exact scientific concept, that is indeed a problem with the social sciences, there's a reason it's called a soft science. Still, studying these things do have value and even if it's not easy to quantify what exactly people are feeling, we have to use words to describe difficult concepts, as imprecise as it all is. The big thing is we should approach it all with more scientific rigour, as much as possible, despite it being a soft science. We've let through a lot of bad social science studies make it through, including famous ones like the Stanford Prison Experiment, and Gino's falsified papers are just another in a long line of papers we don't examine nearly as thoroughly as we should.
@@Krossfyre I think most "soft science" has zero value to society. This entire world is just fake through and through.
The entire field of social psychology would fall apart if you required rigorous, reproduceable studies. It's not really a science.
@@KrossfyreThey don't have value when done the way it's done today because it's not reproduceable. It makes you think we know things when we actually don't.
It's very difficult to make these things reproduceable because it's so hard to control for all the variables at play in social situations, not to mention hard to even make the definitions. Imo it is worse to think we know things and be wrong than it is to admit we don't understand.
Social issues have always been dealt with using philosophy, and those are effective tools. There is no reason it needs to be an experimental science.
The majority of scientific papers are written to be written not written to be read. The real change needed at the PhD level is to reduce the expectations that PhD students publish before graduation. The other change is that teaching posts at universities should be judged on the ability to teach at the point of comformation in post or tenure and a track for promotion within universities that allows promotion by doing teaching and admin work alone.
The reason for doing so is to reduce the dependence of academics on publishing large amounts of utter tripe to progress in their careers and instead have the risks of publishing cr@p far out weight the risks of not publishing anything or not publishing enough.
This doesn’t just happen in bullsh!t fields like business studies. There was a lot of research published on Covid19 biology and treatment during 2020 and 2021 most of it was total garbage. This very quickly came to light and most of it was corrected by additional and better papers but you still have people thinking that horse deworming tablets will protect them from coronavirus.
This wasn’t anything new it was just that obscure papers from obscure labs were getting read for the first time. And the amount of total sh!t being published was revealed.
I love how in her arrogance of thinking she would win she was proven to be completely fraudulent.
Nah, she's just stretching out things, maybe they'll give up who knows, did she have to pay for it. nope, cost her nothing.
Her breach of contract claims against Harvard were not dismissed. That part of the case can proceed.
it's US justice. The results depend largely on how much power you have. Trump is still free.
harvard is completely fraudulent
@@l.w.paradis2108 yeah, I’m sure that’ll make up for her reputation and career being permanently destroyed.
7:53
The lawsuit mentioned "sex-based discrimination".
Holy cow 😂 of all the cards she could play, she played the woman card so badly lol.
It was women that uncovered the fraud right?
For her own gain, she is willing to set back other women
It's been months since the original video came out, but I think she blamed the men for sexism and the woman for sabotage, but I wouldn't be surprised if she blamed _all_ of them for sexism and her assistant for sabotage. The funny thing is, from what I've seen, is these errors were found *early on,* but Gina _ignored_ them. Money was probably too good for her.
Agreed, it's really bad, especially when they try to use that as a cover
Racism ?
How Data Fraud Makes Me Feel Dirty - author Dra. Francesca Gino
Talk data fraud to me...
I suspect this is far more prevalent than anybody is willing to talk about.
Yeap. I suggest watching a video by Upper Echelon called Gamers Versus Scientists. It is quiet interesting on the topic.
I had a friend who was doing their PhD as part of a group engaged in lab research. She discovered her boss, and his employee (her direct colleague) who he was sleeping with, were fabricating the data. Not by much, but still. To make it more appealing and conclusive when published.
She had a choice of going public with it, and having to start her PhD from scratch, throwing away all her own research for the group, and be associated with the boss engaged with data fraud, or stay silent and hope for the best. She kept her mouth shut, and now has a job, and a doctorate.
Not a lot of people are willing to risk their own livelihood to stand up for corruption. And this stuff happens, ALL THE TIME. It's a well known 'industry secret'.
I feel like science is fundamentally flawed because of how much we glorify new results.
We need to celebrate stuides that find no connection. And studies which replicate previous studies
oh, the scientists do. but the layperson who doesn't understand how science works will not understand why money is being spent on reinforcing old ideas when new, potentially groundbreaking studies catch the media, catch the news, and can be politicised and monetised
Indeed. When the target becomes the goal, the goal becomes the target. People have an incentive to fabricate research to obtain prestige and money. Hence, research inflation
@@Goldfox2112scientists don’t celebrate those types of studies lmao! At best they view it as necessary drudgery that should be done by someone else. Money and recognition is only in new, groundbreaking studies.
@@GunvaldtheoneandonlyScientists do. It's rare and extremely important to replicate protocols, it can save your lab a lot of money when you know you're not wasting resources. And using funds effectively makes a lab more efficent and productive.
Well said. We live in a stoopid era where we were told everything had to be 'disruptive' and all it has done is wrecked society. Modern academia is very broken.
Rather than being rare, I suspect that it's just been ignored, unrecognized, under-reported.
We've seen so many scandals like this in everything from psychology to physics, that I don't even think it can be described as uncommon.
Can you link any other scandals?
@@somethingelse9228 start with Hwang Affair in S. KOREA on genetic stem research! There are many others.
@@somethingelse9228
Can't link any thing because... TH-cam.
There was something similar with Columbia and there was some German wunderkind a few years ago also caught by Data Colada doing materials research on novel substrates for semiconductors.
Then there was the Theranos debacle, the Korean room temp superconductor scandal... Three or four new cold fusion scandals...
And the beer virus controversies that YT still treats as conspiracy theories.l and the safety/efficacy claims for the mRNA protocols associated with it...
Then, there have been a half dozen claims in cosmology/astrophysics made in popular media publications prior to being torn apart in peer review. One suggesting that dark matter was responsible for infrared emissions from Jupiter.
And, while I can't recall anything much about it I vaguely recall someone in NC being accused of plagiarism.
I'm not suggesting that the proportion of published works has been significant just that there appears to be a growing trend of increasing reports of ethical concerns within science, medical and tech.
@@somethingelse9228 I forget the channel, but there are videos on scandals with finding new elements and another physics scandal. There's also one about (I think) stem cells in S. Korea
Maybe not scandal, but I think of all the studies done on say, food and how over a period of my lifetime 40-50 years how things are bad for you, are discovered to be good for you then bad for you...etc. etc. ad nauseum. eggs, coffee, steak... and it makes me wonder if this just hasn't been some sort of game all along, none of these studies were thorough, or a narrow conclusion got expanded into a more headline worthy conclusion "Don't eat eggs"!!! 50 years ago they gave you salt tablets working in a hot environment, salt became bad for you but now you consume salt again under the name electrolytes. Maybe our knowledge has expanded, I dunno, but people knew to take cod liver oil and here we are these many years later eating fish for fatty acids all the while funding entire careers that really didn't matter at all and it just seems like a lifetlme of make-work for the academic industry.
Pete Judo with 100k+ subscribers. Special thanks to: Ms. Francesca Gino.
He got his silver play button real quick.
@@MakerInMotion
I was looking at that thinking, '"they must have an automatic door with that button"
Good for him, but I wish he gave more credit to the original creators he takes material from, especially given his brand of content. There is a video that is a ripoff from Bobby Broccoli and he barely acknowledges him.
@@ingGS Which video? Post a link please.
@@stephenmcinerney9457 I think they're referring to Pete's video on Jan Hendrik Schön.
I wonder how common this is in science where big money/prestige is involved. I was all bright eyed and full of dreams when I went to grad school for biochemistry at UCD, full boat for a lab doing 'groundbreaking' research for a biotech company. When I started my first set of experiments that would be my first paper, I was told that I should find a way to make the data suggest a certain thing- in a full lab meeting, deception meant nothing. I should have known, I asked about if a paper they wrote was right about a suggested signaling method- they said, "We knew that wasn't the case when we wrote the paper, we just wanted to throw the other labs off". How much of our science is polluted? I was only in that lab for one year. edit: First time viewer, and needed the full story. Thanks!
Tell us, please - how is Gino ultimately being held accountable beyond [finally] being dismissed from Harvard?!! Is her fraud criminal; can she be held criminally liable?
Shouldn’t she have to REPAY every dollar 💰 of profit she ever earned from all book sales, bc they were sold as non-fiction, yet were totally misleading and inaccurate, etc/&, &…
The Memorandum Opinion I just read states that several breach of contract claims against Harvard were not dismissed. It is dated Sept. 11, 2024. She can proceed on those. So, this video is misleading as well.
Sigh.
When people talk about a case, look up the case.
Finding fraudsters is science too:
She had a theory.
Did research.
Underwent peer review.
FUBAR from start to finish.
I AM STEALING THIS! "She was already scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point, but this really took the barrel away...." Very good!!
shes terrible just like that lying daniel ariely LOL
Can Gino be sued by Harvard or anyone else to recoup wages etc? Book publishers for example, can they sue her for deceiving them? I certainly hope so.
I was thinking the same thing. It’s not right that she would be able to walk away from this and still be a millionaire from fraud
I think you could, but the legal fees would probably eat up all the money you would get back and then some.
Science = falsifiability and peer review. This scientist takes here peers to court when they question her results?! Just let that sink it. It's hilarious!
I have a friend who was the chief librarian at a major university. As part of her job she published the PhD thesis of professors who worked there. After Prof X's thesis was published, it was roundly criticized for self-plagiarism (something I'd never heard of) and several other issues. As a result, Prof X was terminated, but she had come from a rich family and was not going to accept that result. She sued the university, the top administration, the librarian, and anyone else she could name, demanding millions from them for lost salary and lost income from consulting. Prof X's case got dismissed from lower court, so she appealed two more times. It took years, and created lots of stress for those she was suing, but it was finally dismissed. They considered counter-suing, but decided to end the whole embarrassing mess.
We need about 100 Data Coladas. To start with.
That sounds a bit ambitious. How about we start with 100 pina coladas.
@@drmodestoesq that's the joke
And getting caught in the rain. 🎶
It’s not like the student raised claims against Einstein.. The initial paper in the video has a topic that could not be of any use to anyone, private, public and third sectors included.. Feeling dirty after networking? Where are we? In a South Park episode?
I feel dirty after looking at Ms. Gino's face, and not the good kind of "dirty".
The clarification was needed
(@RavenMobile)
Well, as long as its "new"... American Education is a fucking joke
Well put! Who really gives a hot crap! This sort of ‘breaking news’ in the field of social science is just academics acting as influencers.
More generally speaking, I'd like to live in a world in which if you file a lawsuit for defamation and you lose you _automatically_ pay a certain percentage of what you asked for to the defendant (plus expenses of course).
Yeah, many countries already have "losing party pays". Otherwise, you can sue someone into oblivion (especially in a David/Goliath situation). Lately, anti-SLAPP laws have helped.
@@UncleKennysPlace they do? I mean not only expenses and not only the _possibility_ of a counter lawsuit, which the "David" party would rarely dare to start...more like an automatic percentage so that you already know what you're going to pay if you file & lose (for defamation! Not in general)
I didn't know about your anti slapp law, interesting.. I'm from Europe, where freedom of speech is more disregarded in general, and defamations and libel can already be very wide and arbitrary.
One of the problems is, the judiciary system is clogged with people getting offended - and rightly accused.
@@nefaristo That would be a very dumb rule as it would discourage meritorious defamation cases from being brought in the first place, especially when the plaintiff does not have deep pockets.
@@andrewb8235 that's a dumb reply, if your case is good its good: maybe don't make false cases based on feelings.
In medicine, this type of law actually WAS put into the books, but then it was struck down by the courts. The argument was that such laws would serve to scare people away from filing legitimate lawsuits against powerful entities. Either way, there's a scenario you can imagine where something unfair happens. I'm a physician and think you're right. But that's the reason that law doesn't exist.
Criminals gotta criminal -- and it's always somehow amazing to me that they have the gall to be offended and try to hurt other people for outing them for being criminals.
Weird, a professional cheater cheats, gets caught, comes up with another cheat scheme, finally gets stopped. For now.
I don't think she can really just take the L and move on. While it's possible she holds on to enough goodwill that she's able to get another job in the industry, I think (hope) that this has ruined her reputation so badly she can never come back. It's probably worth the risk for her to just gamble on the small chance she wins in court to retain her quality of life.
She's done in academia.
@@g00nther She has a pretty good chance to move into grievance studies and grift off of that for a while.
According to google, she’s got a net worth of $20M and 4 kids. The $ is more than enough to assure an excellent quality of life.
And she can save face (somewhat) by using the same lame excuse that executives and politicians use when they get the boot: “I’ve decided to spend more time with my family.”
still, she's got some bucks saved up. It was all worth it.
@@tedjohnson64 exactly, she's won.
Gino tried to blame her fellow researchers for the fraud and alleged it was a deliberate attempt to ruin her reputation.
"It is everybody else's fault but my own."
@@RavenMobile That sounds so very 'Donald'.
@@DrakeN-ow1im He is certainly the only person currently running for president to do so.
/s
What is the responsibility of the peer reviewers? They aren’t there just to agree with the conclusions. They should be assessing the quality and data used. They share some of the blame for approving it.
Good point.
You know it is unpaid, volunteer position where reviewers aren't necessarily full experts in the topic, right? And they don't have access to the data typically. I think you just invented a way to make sure that no paper will ever get a reviewer. Why would anyone ever review a paper then?
Peer review is often not double blind. The reviewer knows the name of the authors. So a lot of inferior papers gets published, because of the name and affiliation the reviewer sees. Other way round: newcomers will have to fight way harder in the review process than established researchers or those who belong to certain in-groups.
Some seem to think their job is to reject everything. Some seem to think their job is to approve everything. Some actually do provide good feedback, but are ignored in favor of one of the first two categories.
The initial study "Does networking can make us feel dirty" : so ridiculous.
Or is brownnosing also called "networking" is academia?
If a student approaches me with any concern of any kind, no matter how ridiculous, I always investigate it thoroughly. That’s one of the requirements to remaining intellectually honest.
Kudos to honest researchers
So I'm a physician here in Los Angeles and I give probably two to three lectures a week and when I'm putting up medical studies I always Make a point to mention one or two Harvard studies and then put a big x through them and say that well since it's from Harvard it's probably plagiarized lol And I get a good laugh from most of the students and professors but they all know it's half true. Harvard has fallen so far.. by the way Stanford Yale and UCLA have also turned into crap
Many years ago a friend of mine got accepted to a graduate program at Cornell. I congratulated and told him it was a big deal.
He said the best line I have ever heard regarding academia
"It's not that big of a deal, the Ivy League is just where privilege is laundered into merit."
My graduate program was far from Ivy but demanded passing 10 out of 10 exams to even be accepted into the program. Those 10 exams covered every facet of my discipline that should have been learned as an undergraduate. All students so accepted then were required, no matter their chosen area of specialty, to take 15 credit hours in experimental design and statistics. My non-mathematical brain (some of us have them) never understood the most advanced math, but I memorized the heck out of everything. What I learned was: 1. To leave actual research to the math nerds. 2. How to read, interpret, and evaluate all scientific research and sort the wheat from the tares. It was 100% worth it. My professors were right.
Ivybridge is all about connections/networking aka nepotism over the academic rigour
If you want pure rigour you don't pic Ivybridge
Diversity is our strength.
that godawful huberman has single handedly rubbished stanfords already dubious name
"Behavioral" and "science" are a dangerous mix. Thank you for your work in the Gino case.
The only rule is any metric used to measure human behavior is bull because humans will game the metric.
As a “behavioral scientist” I concur.
Right? Who thinks that psychology and "Behavioral Science" are really scientific? Don't they just sum up to interesting observations which may, or may not be true? Depends on the context and the culture? Is that valuable?
One of many problems is that "science" likes new breakthrough results and geniuses...as many as possible. The actual work happens quietly with patience and a result of a teamwork, not one genius.
Behavioral science is fascinating. I've read several books about it by Dan Ariely, and I was very interested. Then this happens, and much of what I learned from Dan Ariely was based on this fraudulent research. How can I buy and read any more books on behavioral psychology?
The thing that irritates me is that doing the work correctly would have been easy. Her work was not in a field that requires intense grind.
I speculate that she was tasked with massaging the field to suit other end goals and the means that she used were not important.
You will find that people who rise to the top have skeletons because that makes them controllable and so those are the ones who are promoted. The right lapel pin, handshake or YGL status means you have friends in high places, they help you and you are expected to help them or you are toast. I do not know how she is connected but books full of plagiarism means that she was propped up to get to the position of influence that she held.
Obviously if you have no skeletons yet but are driven with an ego and lacking in morals you will be offered a visit to Diddi's Rooms or Epstein Island to earn some skeletons.
How much are you willing to bet that the reason the supervisors pressured Zoé Ziani to stop her inquiry was because they were themselves engaging in that kind of fraud?
Heck yeah, probably 1 of the peer reviewers
Scintillating premise.
It’s of course possible, but I think the most likely explanations are a lot more banal - they didn’t want to risk professional backlash from criticizing a big shot in the field (perhaps they knew Gino wouldn’t go down without a fight), they didn’t want to take the time to understand Zoe’s concerns and evidence and it was easier to just brush her off, or maybe they just didn’t want to spend a lot of time and resources following up on something that wouldn’t benefit their own careers very much. Not a defense of the advisors, just saying that brazen careerism is common enough in the academy that there doesn’t have to be any deeper reason behind it.
@@pbriffy You make a good point. I am probably jaded by my own experiences.
Just so you have an idea of where I come from, while I was a PhD student, pretty much everyone of my colleagues in the university thought it was perfectly normal to "improve" their data (and don't get me started with plagiarism problems).While writing my PhD thesis, I was aghast to discover that my supervisor had actually manipulated my raw data behind my back to make it more publishable.
But this was only the tip of the iceberg. I was expected to regularly do 48+-hour sessions in the lab mixing dangerous products and solvents in an underground room with absolutely no ventilation. When I brought this up to my "pastoral advisor" he dismissed it, suggesting that personal minor sacrifices were expected in academia and I should focus on climbing the totem pole if I wanted my situation to improve. I would later learn that he and my supervisor were business associates.
Later on, my supervisor tried to blackmail me (and no, this isn't an exaggeration: it is the legal textbook definition of blackmail) into working on his pet projects on my free time.
Also, the University made a few clerical errors during my registration that would turn my life into an absolute administrative and financial nightmare for a couple of years.
Once I returned to my country to write my thesis, my doctor said that my bloodwork results made no sense as they suggested I had the liver of a terminal alcoholic (I barely drink). I guess three years breathing solvents and volatile chemicals in a lab without any ventilation were finally catching up.
At that point I thought, "You know what? F*** all this". Even though I had almost finished writing my PhD, I destroyed all my samples, erased all my data, refused handing any of my notebooks and lab books, and ghosted everyone from the University. I didn't even bother to inform my supervisor about the breakthroughs I had made throughout my final year and my latest publishable (and even patentable) results.
Thanks sooooo much for creating this wrap up video!! Truly appreciate it!!
Academia is totally broken. 😂
Sex based discrimination? Really. She got a lawyer to file that?
how is that peer review system working out ?? smh.. This is probly the tip of a very large iceburg..
It definitely is.
Behavioral psychology hardly counts as science.
I consider the 1% parasites that continue to be hugely sucessful with social conditioning the 99% working class, would appreciate your opinion on BP.
Except their tools work, so.....
@@d.thorpe2046 sometimes even as much as a quarter as often as they fail.
Would love to hear your opinion of Stanford's "Top 2% Scientists" list
I know without looking. Rich chumps, DEI appointees, frauds, nepo babies, and any combination thereof
"Fraud is quite rare"
How is this possible to know? Wouldn't this require an audit? Or an attempt to try to replicate the conclusions from the academic papers?
This is excellent. How many more academic grifters need to be exposed and removed, a thousand? 10,000?
So what happens to public policies and legislation which was passed on the basis of such fraudulent research?
Nothing. Politicians don't care if it's true, just if it looks good or gives more power
@@User-y9t7u And that's a huge problem because people may have to live with the consequences of such legislation for generations.
@@thebeatnumber only way to stop it is to get involved and push exclusively for the truth. The full truth.
Don't trust bs, "believe the science" or accusations without proof
The same thing that happens to temporary laws put in place during times of emergency, once the emergency passes...
People die.
Only case of dreadful science at Harvard?
Hardly. Most scientific opinions and far too many scientists are for sale to the highest bidder.
That's how the manufacturers of the catastrophic mRNA jabs secured so many defenders.
Harvard and the ivy league schools has gone downhill in quality
Keep them coming! These videos are of monumental importance. Truth is the bedrock of all human endeavor. Without it, well… without truth we are f’d.
I wonder what Gino is doing for money? I would bet she lives a typical (expensive) upper class life that must be hard to maintain without a prestigious job. And lawsuits arent cheap i wouldnt think.
She could learn to code lol?
You dont hear the L word in this. Gino is lying it appears?
The only difference between Fransesca Gino and any pathological liar is sophistication.
If an art museum admits to having a fake painting, it calls into question their entire collection. Academia may have the same problem.
Laughable proposition. If the Chicago Art Museum discovers and reveals a fake artwork, 99% of art lovers would not assume the other works are fraudulent.
Their collectiond should always be suspect. More than one art gallery has a fake. There was 60 Minute story on it years ago. A friend who works with medical studies says about a third of papers are poorly designed and/or fraudulent.
@@FogelsChannel I would definitely question their collection.
When you hand a bank teller $1000 in $100 dollar bills and the 3rd $100 dollar bill is counterfeit, should the teller assume the remaining 7 $100 dollar bills are legit and stop checking for counterfeit bills? Of course not. Every teller in the country would double/triple check every $100 dollar bill in that stack.
Half the people in this county question everything in a museum from small ancient artifacts to human skeletons and they should.
She lost her desperate grab to salvage her career. Serves her right. But there should be some criminal consequences for using grant money (i.e., money elicited from government or private donors to conduct legitimate research) in a fraudulent manner.
I would wager that sometime in the future, you will do another video on this lady.
Since it is a fact that replication is a huge problem within the social sciences, why are so many educational institutions heavily reliant on social scientists?
Edit: Added comment
"it is a fact that replication is a huge problem in science, why are so many educational institutions heavily reliant on science?" FIFY. The replication crisis does not discriminate
@@Creationweek It isn't a fact that replication is a problem in the hard sciences. It is a fact that replication is a huge problem in the social sciences.
Because it says what we want to hear
@@samsonsoturian6013 More accurately "Because it _can be made_ to say what we want to hear." (Just a quibble.)
@@charlie-qh2ll I would argue it's the most egregious in psychology and medicine it's also pretty bad in economics. the recent rash of physics retractions indicate it's bad everywhere
I feel that her co-authors should also be held accountable! If you publish anything together, you are equally responsible...
I wonder if there were others who, knowing what was happening, demanded the removal of their names. The answer might be buried in those 1,300 pages that haven't seen the light of day.
It looks like Data Colada is gettin caught in the rain.
I once heard "Cheating" described as a skill that develops in parallel with legitimate skills. The more you improve at "Cheating"/"lying" the more you realize that it takes just as much effort to cheat seamlessly as it does to do the actual work. Once the 'cheater' realizes this they become 'gamblers' and they bet that uncovering/proving the 'lie' will take a lot of effort that will likely not be rewarded. Thus the longer you cheat successfully the more likely you will start to become lazy with covering your tracks. Truly disciplined 'cheaters' therefore should probably not waste time with cheating at all and just do the hard work.
As an endocrinologist in my field i know that most of the publications from superstars is either fabricated or stolen....if industry sponcered almost always.
The way i find better science is by reading the questions posted for authors and their responces .very few people read them ...please do read beacuse a theif can find theif.you will learn the art.
AI could make it much harder to detect data manipulation in scientific research, which is often caught through human errors like copy-pasting mistakes, duplicated graphs, or statistical inconsistencies. In some cases, researchers have even fabricated entire datasets to support their hypotheses. With AI, you could easily generate a dataset with any number of rows that perfectly fits a desired outcome, eliminating the typical signs of fraud. This would make it far more difficult to spot manipulations, such as those seen in the case of Professor Francesca Gino, where errors in data handling revealed the falsification. As AI advances, we need to be more vigilant about safeguarding scientific integrity
At the same time AI is already making it easier to find fraud because it can parse a person's entire lifetime of work for data inconsistencies faster then a human can finish a single paper.
@@williamjenkins4913 I was going to say, we'll probably end up with AI wars.
Yup. Entire science around it already, without the need for AI. We call them Monte Carlo studies or simulations, but they actually are pretty easy to do in basic R. AI will mean that no one gets caught for plagiarism again due its paraphrasing capacity. To prevent science from effectively dying, we need to invest in data provenance with multiple sign offs. Otherwise, the noise will drown out the signal.
Leave it to beginners to uncover things like this and cause a stir. Data fraud hurts science as a way of knowing the truth, and it is a shame it takes so little to defraud the community and takes so long to correct the harm and damage caused by it. Glad those who work to correct the record can sleep better at night.
*Achieving debt freedom and building a $230,000 savings in record time is just like a miracle to me - thank you, Stacey Neal Brooks!*
I keep seeing different commendations about this Stacey, she must be really good for people to speak so highly of her.
She is really a good investment strategist. I was privileged to attend some of her seminars.
That was how I started my cry’pto investment journey
I remain eternally grateful to Stacey as well, for her efforts that got me to this point, finally paid off my mortgage and all debts, what more could l've asked for. She changed my life for good.
I got to know about her last year, started with about $8000 and my made slightly over 77k. That's close to what I make in a year from my job
Nice meeting people who also work with Stacey, she's the only one I could trust, she got me proflts of 14,OOO with a little start up of 2,5OO and ever since she has been delivering.
Maybe she lost, but imagine her potential in the private sector...you know, proving things like how cigarettes are safe, sugar is healthy, etc.
Or the vaccine is actually safe and effective ;)
@@g.i.520 Vaccines are safe and effective. Unless you actually wanted to have smallpox...
Sociopaths abound on all walks of life...
...as do frauds, cheats, rentiers, market manipulators, pastors, preachers, priests, etc.
$450k Returns the Lord is my saviour in times of my need!!!
wow this awesome 👏 I'm 37 and have been looking for ways to be successful, please how??
After I raised up to 325k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the states 🇺🇸🇺🇸 also paid for my son's surgery (Oscar). Glory to God.shalom.
It's Ms. Susan Jane Christy doing, she's changed my life.
I do know Ms. Susan Jane Christy, I also have even become successful....
Absolutely! I've heard stories of people who started with little to no knowledge but made it out victoriously thanks to Ms. Susan Jane Christy.
4:29 "After all, fraud on this scale and of this magnitude is quite rare".
I laughed out loud.
Yes, this will continue as long as science = carrerism. (Grants vs IP, copyrights, trademarks, assets…)
This bridges science with our actual political economy - by any name we give it, like it or not. It is what it is…
That bridge is a powerful motivator for bias outside of actual science, if money & || “ownership” drives it. 😊
Another example of Streisand effect at work
I'm tired of fraud scientists.
It seems to be everywhere.
Stay away from "climate science" then.
We’re all terribly weary and tired of the people who pretend the problem is science.
I wasn't financial free until my 40's and I'm still in my 40's, bought my third house already, earn I'm in a monthly through passive income, and i got 4 out of 5 goals, just hope it encourages someone here. that it doesn't matter if you don't have any of them right now, you can start Today's regardless your age to Invest and change your future! Investing in the financial market is a grand choice I made.
I’ve been following Jason Graystone FX strategy for a while now. His insights are incredible
Same here, he really know is stuff. I never felt lost with him guiding me.
Profitable trading requires experience, a solid strategy, and preparation, which we lack. Understanding buy/sell ratios, identifying market leaders, and diversifying are key to reducing risk
@@hannabas8198yes
Have you thought about investing?
Heavy is the head that wears the crown. We'd be shocked at how faked and phony our society really is
Excellent vid… thanks. You took a complicated incident and brought into rigorous focus. Well done.
Can they sue her to get compensation? is she ever going to work in academia ever again? She should go into the private sector where they value psychopaths and fraudsters and bullshit artists.
The Memorandum Opinion I just read states that several breach of contract claims against Harvard were not dismissed. It is dated Sept. 11, 2024. She has until mid-October to file an amended complaint against Harvard as sole defendant.
When someone who isn't a lawyer talks about some case, you have to look up the case. 😒
And this is what a narcissist looks like
Its good but i disagree that this is the only good outcome. If it had gone to trial, gino would also have to spend a lot of money and in all likelihood she would have lost and had to pay damages as well which would have been so sweet.
The cost for the innocent parties would have been immense in both money and stress. Whilst she would be deserving of further loss, the innocent parties need not be put through such a thing. She received a loss in court, and the innocent weren't put through a full proceeding: in some ways, it is the "best of both worlds."
You giving credit for Data Colada for not going public with the story before Harvard did their own investigation is everything that is wrong with the scientific community. You should be able to discuss bad data without it being controversial. Same goes for you giving credence to arguments from people who know Gino saying "I don't think she's the type of person to do that", it does not matter what people think, science is supposed to be about what we can prove, not just opinions. Same should apply for the people in it, Gino from day one was proven to have been a part of serious misconduct, nobodies thoughts about her beyond that matter.
According to news her lawsuit against Harvard for breach of contract is still going forward. Also you're wrong about this ending future defamation lawsuits. This is one judge. For it to have more teeth it need to go to The Supreme Court and frankly I don't see how they could say no one could ever sue if they felt defamed.
It's over.... The academia has fallen... Billions must retract
Thank god, reason prevailed. And thanks to Data Colada! But the fact that this went on for so long at a top school makes you wonder what else is rotten in Denmark... This kind of crap seems much easier to pull in social sciences than in the "hard" sciences, physics, engineering etc - things there are usually much easier to replicate/verify or reject.
You’re also far more likely to get published in a major journal if your findings support the current sociopolitical narrative.
Just take a look at the table of contents on any given month of the New England Journal of Medicine, or Pediatrics. 100% chance you will find a study supporting evidence of inequities or gender confusion, etc.
Medicine has been infected with politics and the soft social sciences.
Dean Datar. Could the writers of this show not come up with a believable name for the Dean
That really is his name, do you think this is all pretend?
@@Sashazuryep I assumed this is all pretend, I certainly wasn't pointing out the punniess of the deans name. As you are the only big brain in the comment section you were able to hunt down my idiotic comment and publicly shame me. You sir are truly the winner of TH-cam comments. Where do you teach?
@@freshmaker0088 Seek psychological help before your condition becomes lethal.
@@Sashazur "What is _tard,_ and why is it bad to get it twice"
And now I know.
The action by this fraudster so undermines science in general.
Her 👺 supervisors already knew this was happening 🥵
Of course she claims discrimination based on gender too, what a shock
She minored in victimology.
If you think silencing is bad just question climate change. Your career is over.
Bovine excrement.
Climate Change science is being reveiwed minute by minute by many thousands of researchers and frequently being updated.
Shockingly, you cannot even lodge a paper in Turkish Universities in North Cyprus, before it's "plagiarism checked" _which is really simple to do online._
If you haven't done this: your lecturer certainly will!
Is there some procedure her University lecturer failed to carry out too?
Curiouser and curiouser.
For entertainment/educational purposes only!
Student papers are routinely checked for plagiarism here as part of the submission process as well. This isn't a case of someone stealing others' content or work, but of making it up entirely, then trying to claim victimhood when you're found out.
@@drstewart Watch again, she's accused of plagiarism too!
For entertainment/educational purposes only!
@@johnkean6852 No need. Your subtle dig at universities other than Turkish ones in North Cypress was unnecessary and invalid. There are many ways to plagiarize, and implying deficiency of other universities because a prominent case got through is lame.
@@drstewart l disagree: prominant universities set the standards.
"Dig:" lf it was one it was at _lecturers_ allowing papers to be lodged without checking them. A job they're paid well for especially in _prominant_ universities. This won't reflect well on their university, so no, the lecturer's fault. Don't kill the messenger.
Are you saying it's therefore ok for prominant universities to allow this?
Adds to the conspiracy that, at prominant universities, you can actually buy your diploma: no need to do any study/work just party whilst you're there...
I fear: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
For entertainment/educational purposes only!
@@drstewart (Nota bene: you're teasing me right? You know the island is spelt thusly: _Cyprus,_ yes?)
You certainly like controversy, that's for sure.
For entertainment/educational purposes only!
Let’s not pretend she set up the support website. Her lawyers did.
Thanks, your presentation of this was very well done.
The precedent is still clear: Don't do the right thing, you get no reward except financial ruin as you waste years of your life paying lawyer fees. This case demonstrates how a group of criminals with the malice of forethought secretly agreed to enrich themselves through the commission of fraud. Why? They knew they would get away with it, and they have. Don't waste your life in fruitless public arguments. Please leave it in the hands of content creators so we can at least have a bit of entertainment. RIP science.
Doctor Francesca Gino has never taken an L in her life. Laughable suggestion! Also, keep in mind, this went down during what I would call 'Peak Girl Boss' era. She felt more invincible and empowered than at any other time in herstory. The idea that three (white) guys from a silly internet blog, were going to put her in her place, was so foreign to her, was an idea so incomprehensible, she lost the ability to emphasis and see things from their perspective. In her mind she was Harvard Professor, Doctor Francesca Gino, of course she was right. Who wouldn't file a slam dunk wrongful termination lawsuit?!
Well said.
“Girl Boss” is just a way of attacking women for behaving like jerk men. It’s so embarrassing. A bad person is bad regardless of gender. Yes, she was full of herself but her gender has nothing to do with it.
@@DoctorBiobrain 7:53 It's embarrassing to play the girlvictim card as well. Guess gender does have something to do with it.
@@drstewart I’m confused. Are you accusing me of playing the girlvictim card? Because I agree that it’s embarrassing if she acted like she was a victim due to her gender, but…that’s why gender shouldn’t have been involved. And if you think her gender wasn’t an issue then we’re in agreement.
But I’m not defending her at all. I’m pushing back against obvious sexism from people who only mention gender when a woman is involved but don’t think of gender when it’s a man. That’s due to unconscious bias that needs to be called out, so I did.
@@DoctorBiobrain She brought up gender. It was part of her crying wolf when she got caught. No, recognizing when someone's trying every tactic to avoid responsibility isn't unconscious bias, it's called having integrity. Also, assuming unconscious bias at the mention of identity labels is lame. Major projection.
Gino reminds me of Elizabeth Holmes. Both are sociopathic narcissists of the first degree and both have horrible PR instincts. They should have taken a page out of the book of Louis CK. When publicly outed for sexual misconduct, Louis' immediate response was a full and frank confession. As a result, he is still widely regarded by fans and, although it faltered at first, his career has continued to this day. Louis CK is an entirely different kind of person than either Gino or Holmes, of course. He has a conscience. I don't know what in hell either of those women are going to do with their lives going forward, but I can't imagine they're gonna have a whole lot of fun.
This is the tiniest tip of the giant iceberg of bad science!
State of US academia in nutshell.