1. Fabrication, Falsification, and the Sanctity of Data Prof. William Ullman College of Marine and Earth Studies University of Delaware, Lewes 13 March 20081RAISE Fabrication and Falsification

2. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification2 Federal Policy on Research Misconduct* Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. * US Office of Science and Technology Policy.

3. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification3 Fabrication Fabrication is the description of experiments not actually performed, the invention of data not actually collected, and/or the reporting of these experiments and results.

4. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification4 Falsification (Cooking and Trimming) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. Cooking is retaining and reporting only the data that fits the theory and discarding others. Trimming is the smoothing of irregularities to make the data look more accurate and precise than they really are.

5. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification5 Colleagues/readers are entitled to: Honor and Integrity in Science See all of the necessary data; Know how the data was collected; Know the limits of the methods; and Make their own judgments based on your data! Nullius in Verba!

6. Deborah’s and Kathleen’s Data: A Case Study* Deborah (graduate student) and Kathleen (post doc) make expensive measurements at a national laboratory to verify a newly proposed theory. When they complete the experiment and return to their own lab, they review their data and compare it with the new theory. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification6 *From: On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research, 2 nd Edition. National Academy Press, 1995

7. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification7 Prediction from Theory

8. Deborah’s and Kathleen’s Data: A Case Study* During the experiments at the national laboratory, they observed unpredictable, uncontrollable, and unexplained fluctuations in the responses for two data points that fell the furthest from the theoretical prediction. They also found out that another research group, pursuing similar experiments, had independently verified the proposed theory. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification8

9. Deborah’s and Kathleen’s Data: A Case Study* Kathleen suggests that, due to the observed fluctuations, these points be omitted from the statistical analysis, but, of course, be reported in the paper to be published from this experiment. In the text they will say that these points reflect anomalies associated with power fluctuations and are outside of the uncertainty associated with all of the points. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification9

10. Deborah’s and Kathleen’s Data: A Case Study* How should the data from the two points be handled? Should the data be included in the statistical tests? Who can they go to for advice? Is this paper ready to be written? 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification10

11. Deborah’s and Kathleen’s Data: A Case Study* Are there problems with Deborah’s and Kathleen’s approach to their data? How would you examine this data? What is a datum? Is there something called “self-deception?” 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification11

12. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification12

13. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification13

14. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification14

15. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification15

16. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification16

17. 13 March 2008RAISE Fabrication and Falsification17 Fabricate experiment & data Cooking Trimming Report all as measured with uncertainty Report all as measured without uncertainty Eliminate on deviation from expectations Eliminate on a posteriori analysis Eliminate experimental anomalies