Fwd: NYTimes: Fraud Scandals Sap China’s Dream of Becoming a Science Superpower
Joyce Ogburn
Begin forwarded message:
From: Joyce Ogburn <jogbu...@gmail.com>
Date: October 14, 2017 at 9:42:15 AM EDT
To: joyce ogburn <ogbu...@appstate.edu>
Subject: NYTimes: Fraud Scandals Sap China’s Dream of Becoming a Science Superpower
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/world/asia/china-science-fraud-scandals.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
Fraudulent research and faked peer reviews have led to a humiliating setback for China’s goal of becoming a global leader in scientific research.
Sent from my iPad
David Wojick
David
--
As a public and publicly-funded effort, the conversations on this list can be viewed by the public and are archived. To read this group's complete listserv policy (including disclaimer and reuse information), please visit http://osinitiative.org/osi-listservs.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Open Scholarship Initiative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to osi2016-25+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to osi20...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/osi2016-25.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Jo De
This strikes me as the standard anti-Chinese rhetoric, of which there is a surprising amount. China is producing vast amounts of research, second only to the US. They are already a science superpower.
David
Good morning, y’all. I just read this article in The NY Times about China’s ambitions in research and the amount of fraud and retraction that is occurring. Relevant to discussions earlier on the list.Joyce--Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:From: Joyce Ogburn <jogbu...@gmail.com>
Date: October 14, 2017 at 9:42:15 AM EDT
To: joyce ogburn <ogbu...@appstate.edu>
Subject: NYTimes: Fraud Scandals Sap China’s Dream of Becoming a Science Superpowerhttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/world/asia/china-science-fraud-scandals.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
Fraudulent research and faked peer reviews have led to a humiliating setback for China’s goal of becoming a global leader in scientific research.
Sent from my iPad
As a public and publicly-funded effort, the conversations on this list can be viewed by the public and are archived. To read this group's complete listserv policy (including disclaimer and reuse information), please visit http://osinitiative.org/osi-listservs.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Open Scholarship Initiative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to osi2016-25+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to osi20...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/osi2016-25.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
As a public and publicly-funded effort, the conversations on this list can be viewed by the public and are archived. To read this group's complete listserv policy (including disclaimer and reuse information), please visit http://osinitiative.org/osi-listservs.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Open Scholarship Initiative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to osi2016-25+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Wagner, Caroline S.
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2017 11:53 AM
To: David Wojick
Cc: osi20...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: NYTimes: Fraud Scandals Sap China’s Dream of Becoming a Science Superpower
Joyce Ogburn
Glenn Hampson
I think it’s important here David---like with the rise of small publishers you’ve so often spoken about---to see this not as evidence of some national character flaw, but as evidence of what’s wrong with scholarly publishing in general. This article describes how Chinese researchers are pressured to produce quantity over quality and describes how they rely on impact factors---the same criticisms we make about research everywhere. But it also points out how their rapidly growing institutions haven’t caught up yet in ethical standards with regard to peer review and the falsification of data. According to this article, plagiarism is now on the decline in China thanks to growing awareness about the ethical guidelines regarding this practice.
So while I agree with you that we should be careful not to sound judgmental with these kinds of analyses, I do think the underlying issues need to be noted so we can help address them. To wit, to the extent that OSI and others can help raise standards in China with regard to the falsification of data and faking of peer review, then analyses like this can be helpful.
Best,
Glenn
Rick Anderson
It’s easy enough to characterize the NYT article as “standard anti-Chinese rhetoric” or as “click-bait” and “extreme headlining.” What would be more interesting, though, would be to demonstrate that there’s something wrong with the NYT’s reporting.
This ought to be easy enough to do, since the article in question makes some specific and falsifiable claims. Among them:
* Since 2012, China “has retracted more scientific papers because of faked peer reviews than all other countries and territories put together.”
* A “government investigation highlighted the existence of a thriving online black market that sells everything from positive peer reviews to entire research articles.”
* Although it is a problem in other countries as well (including the United States), “fraud appears to be especially widespread in Chinese academic institutions.”
* According to a Chinese professor, “in China, the cost of cheating is very low. They won’t fire you.”
Is this reporting wrong? (If so, how?) Is the reporting factually correct, but biased or misleading? (If so, what would be a more accurate way of portraying the findings?)
If, on the other hand, the reporting in this article is reasonably accurate and reliable, then this seems like exactly the kind of problem we ought to be worrying about – whether we find it in China or in the US or anywhere else.
---
Rick Anderson
Assoc. Dean for Collections & Scholarly Communication
Marriott Library, University of Utah
Desk: (801) 587-9989
Cell: (801) 721-1687
Anthony Watkinson
I agree with David. It is not now any longer about Chinese research getting accepted it is now getting more citations which may be a guide to quality.
Anthony