So my supervisor is telling me to exclude my experimental results and substitute them with fictional simulated results for this paper I'm about to publish. He doesn't want me to write a paper in a "negative tone" implying failure of the experimental process.
What do Veeky Forums? He's fairly influential so I can't exactly report him without getting my career destroyed.
Just do what you are told, dummy dumb dumb. Don't live the illusion of academia. You think that your paper matters and if you publish false results then in 10 days it will be used in 500 papers and then in a startup and then society will collapse but the reality is that the only people who will read it are the people who know it is wrong, you and your supervisor. Nobody gives a shit about your paper. Just publish it, get your PhD and then let your first shitty paper fade into obscurity. Nobody reads fucking dissertations, why do you think they have to force the people on top in your department to read them. If they don't then nobody will.
Kevin Phillips
>He's fairly influential so I can't exactly report him without getting my career destroyed.
Sure you can, email him with your concerns and try and get something incriminating, then report him to your head of school. If you just go a head with it and you get exposed who do you think is going to get the blame?
Jack Garcia
Record him secretly and fuck his shit.
Gavin Ward
this is why the government shouldnt be involved in science
Anthony Lewis
I thought this too but I'm worried whether this could come back to bite me if the paper somehow is influential?
I don't think you understand. If i rat out my supervisor then if I apply for a job anywhere I will always be known as a snitch and won't get hired.
Benjamin Nguyen
>Nobody reads fucking dissertations from what I've seen most are too lazy to read 10 page papers so pretty much this
Robert Miller
>This is why math is the only science. Fixed.
Adrian Fisher
do you want to live an honest life or a successful one?
Gabriel Nelson
>I don't think you understand. If i rat out my supervisor then if I apply for a job anywhere I will always be known as a snitch and won't get hired. Surely someone values someone with a good ethical compass, unless you're Indian.
Daniel Sullivan
>>>/ethics/
Matthew Kelly
>I don't think you understand
No I do understand, your supervisor is asking you to fake some data and you're considering it because you're a pussy with no back bone or moral fiber. Which is fine, I guess, but you asked for advice and I gave it to you. Now run along and go fake that data like a good little bitch. Also if it ever comes out that you knowingly engaged in fraud how do you think that's going to affect your future career prospects?
John Green
>If i rat out my supervisor then if I apply for a job anywhere I will always be known as a snitch and won't get hired. lol, it will be so much worse if you play along and are later exposed as a fraud.
that said, I don't believe you: Veeky Forums is shitpost central
Jeremiah Rodriguez
>a field in which "influential" people publish massive papers filled with complete gibberish that no one else can understand, claiming it solves historical problems
Grayson Sullivan
How is an honest life going to get me a job?
Say I get a job interview and the guy asks me why I quit my last job, if I told him that it was because I ratted out my supervisor for fraud, then HR would flag me as a potential problem employee = NO JOB
Believe me I want to do the right thing. But I got bills to pay and a very large student loan.
Landon Moore
>I thought this too but I'm worried whether this could come back to bite me if the paper somehow is influential?
>If the paper somehow is influential
If someone actually needs your paper then they will read it thoroughly and find that your stats are bullshit and then say: Well, another bad researcher who can't into stats, what else is new.
If someone tells you about it just say whoops hehe my bad ;^)
If you are a girl then you can add, "You know us girls can be sometimes teehee ;^)"
Zachary Lewis
Tell me. What choice do I really have?
>I don't believe you
I understand the sentiment. But the reason I haven't given any more information is because my research and supervisor is literally a google search away.
Alexander Evans
Why would you need to quit though?
Luke Rodriguez
OP we're not the ones to give you an answer. This is not a science question, it's a values question. You should be asking your mother not us.
The system is corrupted. You've invested a part of your life to enter the system. Are you willing to join the corruption too?
Perhaps your ethics won't let you live in peace with this and you don't belong there. Happens all the time in many careers.
William Rodriguez
>mfw OPs supervisor is testing him and is getting more pissed every moment OP is actually considering faking results
Jordan Anderson
>Say I get a job interview and the guy asks me why I quit my last job, if I told him that it was because I ratted out my supervisor for fraud, then HR would flag me as a potential problem employee = NO JOB
You're fucking retarded, do whatever you want. >Hmmm user, it says here that you were expelled from university, what was that for? >Well I willingly took part in fraud lol, I could have done something about it but I was worried that it would damage my employment opportunities in the future. No biggie though, right? >Well it's been nice interviewing you, we'll be in contact with our decision.
Justin Perry
Lol thats not what happens in the real world
Chase Sullivan
get some damning evidence in writing. email your advisor and ask for clarification while expressing your ethical concerns about using simulated results. then go to higher-ups.
either that or get the evidence, wait until you're safely out of your current institution, and then contact the journal you guys published in to try and get the paper retracted/amended.
Jace Cook
He is a distinguished tenured professor who has won several awards during his career, and wait for it - also the head of department.
How the fuck do i even stand a chance
Julian Ward
Which part? The part where you're removed from university for committing fraud, or the part where companies don't hire proven fraudsters?
Kayden Peterson
if you have him IN WRITING saying "I don't like the results we got, instead use the results I think we should have gotten" then you have a fighting chance. reputation is a lot, but it's not everything. what the hell field is this anyway?
Camden Hall
Companies don't hire fraudsters, yes. But neither do they hire whistleblowers unless you are bringing something of value to them from their competitor / or have dad to hook you up as manager in his investment firm.
Parker Diaz
>what the hell field is this anyway?
One of the 3 hard sciences.
Henry Nguyen
You're fucking retarded. Reporting fraud is a good thing, there would be precious few companies that would see it as a bad thing, especially considering that fraud costs money.
Hunter Phillips
You are looking at it from logical point of view.
Humans are not logical.
If companies really cared about saving money then they wouldn't force their sick employees to turn up to work sick even though reduced productivity due to illness has been proven to negatively impact business profits and GDP.
Mason Taylor
I don't know how else to tell you this: >Companies like money >Fraud costs money >Hiring people that are probably not going to commit fraud is a good thing
You honestly sound like a 15year old.
Chase Harris
Actually fraud makes you a lot of money in the short run, and by the time your lies get discovered and start costing the company money, you'll be out of there.
That's why fraud is so common -- the short-term benefits far exceed the long-term costs.
It's the same reason why it's hard to care about the environment, why people procrastinate, why extremist politics is becoming popular, why banks become "too big to fail", and why no one's doing anything about the heat death of the universe.
Xavier Johnson
We are talking academic fraud here. And it is common. There is a huge problem of moral hazard here in that the academic institutions benefit from NOT stopping fraud since it contributes to the publication count.
Basically you just have to accept it. However you should somehow keep evidence that you were pressured into this position. And hang on to this evidence until EXTERNAL circumstances forces your hand. Even journals protect the fraud, witness the resistance to take Clare Francis seriously even though she (?) has uncovered massive fraud over the years. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clare_Francis_(science_critic)