Allegations of research fakery at a prominent cancer center have brought attention to scientific integrity and the amateur detectives who uncover photo manipulation in published research.
The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, an affiliate of Harvard Medical School, announced on Jan 22 that it is requesting retractions and corrections for scientific papers after a British blogger identified issues in early January.
The blogger, 32-year-old Sholto David of Pontypridd, Wales, is a scientist who detects image manipulation in published scientific papers.
He’s not alone in his sleuthing. Other advocates for scientific integrity also use special software and large computer screens to find image manipulation and potential plagiarism. They are keeping researchers and science journals on their toes.
A detailed look at the situation at Dana-Farber and the detectives hunting for errors and fabrications:
What happened at Dana-Farber?
In a blog post on Jan 2, Sholto David presented suspicious images from more than 30 published papers by four Dana-Farber scientists, including CEO Laurie Glimcher and COO William Hahn. Many images seemed to have duplicated segments that would strengthen the scientists’ results. The papers being scrutinized involve lab research on the workings of cells, including samples from human volunteers’ bone marrow. The blog also included problems raised by David and others on PubPeer, a site that allows anonymous comments on scientific papers.
Student journalists at The Harvard Crimson covered the story on Jan 12. They were followed by reports in other news media, which have been sharpening focus on the attention given to the recent plagiarism investigation involving Claudine Gay, who resigned as former Harvard president earlier this year.
How did Dana-Farber respond?
According to Dana-Farber, it was already investigating some of the issues identified before the blog post. By Jan 22, the institution said it was in the process of requesting six retractions of published research and that another 31 papers warranted corrections. Retractions are serious as it indicates that the research findings could no longer be considered reliable.
Dr. Barrett Rollins, the research integrity officer at Dana-Farber, said “Following the usual practice at Dana-Farber to review any potential data error and make corrections when warranted, the institution and its scientists already have taken prompt and decisive action in 97% of the cases that had been flagged by blogger Sholto David.”
Who are the sleuths?
California microbiologist Elisabeth Bik, 57, has been sleuthing for a decade. Since then, scientific journals have retracted 1,133 articles, corrected 1,017 others and printed 153 expressions of concern, according to a spreadsheet where she tracks results. She has found doctored images of bacteria, cell cultures, and western blots, a lab technique for detecting proteins.
Bik told The Associated Press, “Science should be about finding the truth.” In 2016, she published an analysis in the American Society For Microbiology indicating that nearly 4% of more than 20,000 peer-reviewed papers had image problems, with about half of them appearing intentional.
Both Bik and David earn income as a result of their work, with Bik bringing in donations from Patreon subscribers at about US$2,300 (RM10,879) per month. Technology has made it easier to root out image manipulation and plagiarism, said Ivan Oransky, who teaches medical journalism at New York University and co-founded the Retraction Watch blog.
What motivates misconduct?
Bik said some mistakes could be sloppy errors where images were mislabeled or “somebody just grabbed the wrong photo.” However, some images are obviously altered with sections duplicated, rotated, or flipped. Scientists face pressure to get published and may sometimes intentionally falsify data, aware that the peer review process is unlikely to catch the deception. “At the end of the day, the motivation is to get published,” Oransky said. “When the images don’t match the story you’re trying to tell, you beautify them.”
What happens next?
Scientific journals investigate errors brought to their attention but most often keep their processes confidential until they take action with a retraction or correction. Some journals told the AP they are aware of the concerns raised by David’s blog post and were looking into the matter. – AP
