Intelligent Design Naturalism News Peer review

Let’s hope the term “fake research” doesn’t catch on

Spread the love
File:FileStack.jpg
What’s hot? What’s rot?/Niklas Bildhauer, Wikimedia

In place of “research misconduct.” From Helen Briggs at BBC News:

The scale of “fake research” in the UK appears to have been underestimated, a BBC investigation suggests.

Official data points to about 30 allegations of research misconduct between 2012 and 2015.

However, figures obtained by the BBC under Freedom of Information rules identified hundreds of allegations over a similar time period at 23 universities alone.

Co-founder of Retraction Watch, Dr Ivan Oransky, told BBC News: “We do not have a good handle on how much research misconduct takes place, but it’s become quite clear that universities and funding agencies and oversight bodies are not reporting even a reasonable fraction of the number of cases that they see.” More.

It will be too bad if the term “fake research” catches on, in place of the traditional term “research misconduct,” which covers such issue as plagiarism, fabrication, and piracy.

“Fake research” is modeled, of course, on “fake news,” a term that gained widespread currency only recently. “Fake news” has become nearly useless as a descriptor because the tag gets attached to any information that the hearer does not like, irrespective of provenance. The same thing will happen, and probably quite swiftly, with “fake research.”

“Research misconduct” means misconduct according to a known and agreed set of rules, honed over centuries. It hails from an earlier era, when Piltdown Man, for example, wasn’t just “fake research,” it was a fraud perpetrated for decades.

Researchers today, influenced by post-modernism, probably inwardly reject those standards. In our “many worlds” reality, why aren’t they entitled to enforce acceptance of a reality that helps them grow personally and compensates them for their sufferings due to systemic injustice?

Note—as just one item—the growth of claims that science is post-fact, and objectivity is sexist. And that we need the right kind of post-fact science to help women succeed.

Keep up to date with Retraction Watch.

See also: Peer review “unscientific”: Tough words from editor of Nature

We need the right kind of post-fact science to help women succeed.

Objectivity is sexist.

and

A scientist on the benefits of post-fact science

Also: Part I: What is fake news? Do we believe it?

Part II: Does fake news make a difference in politics?

Part III: What can we do about fake news that would not diminish real news? Critics of ‘fake news’ should go to China — only the government has the right to post fake news.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

3 Replies to “Let’s hope the term “fake research” doesn’t catch on

  1. 1
    Charles says:

    “Fake news” has become nearly useless as a descriptor because the tag gets attached to any information that the hearer does not like, irrespective of provenance.

    OTOH, the preponderance of “news” is leftist and therefore very likely to be fake.

    The cure for “fake research” is replication of results and publication of data, software, experimental setup, etc. Secret pal-reviewed research, is again, very likely to be fake research.

  2. 2
    Bob O'H says:

    OTOH, the preponderance of “news” is leftist and therefore very likely to be fake.

    Now that’s an unkind thing to say of Mrs O’Leary. 🙂

    (note to UD mods: can I have posting rights please, just so I can post as “Fake News”? Pretty please?)

  3. 3

    Hopefully more and more people realize they are being propagandized and indoctrinated by ideologues using the imprimatur of “science”. Just as they took over most of the media as a means of legitimizing their propaganda as “objective news”, so too have they taken over the institution of science to propel their agenda forward.

    The use of the term “fake research” or “fake science” is indeed apropos and quite useful, IMO, especially as a rhetorical device. The term “fake news” has given many people the meme they require to resist the relentless propagandizing by the left; “fake science” is – again – another quality meme of resistance.

    Macroevolution & Climate Change Alarmism = fake science.

Leave a Reply