Two correspondences about miscondut on Today's Nature



所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛http://www.xys.org/cgi-bin/mainpage.pl

送交者: afa 于 2006-7-12, 14:51:29:

Nature 442, 132(13 July 2006) | doi:10.1038/442132a; Published online 12 July 2006

Misconduct: forum should not be used to settle scores
Guosheng Wu

700 Lower State Road, North Wales, Pennsylvania 19454, USA

Sir:
Although China is developing its science and technology at an unprecedented speed, scientific misconduct is a serious issue, as you have highlighted in your Special Report "Named and shamed" (Nature 441, 392–393; 2006)

Shi-Min Fang, the webmaster of New Threads (http://www.xys.org), has defended, in Correspondence (Nature 441, 932; 2006), this website's role in disclosing scientific misconduct on occasions when the authorities have ignored whistleblowers.

Like many other Chinese scientists working overseas, I care very much about scientific misconduct in China. However, I have also been concerned for a long time about the quality of articles published on New Threads. Often, I find that there are few facts and little investigation behind the accusations, and that many articles are mixed with assumptions and personal attacks on named scientific researchers.

One such example is that of Hualiang Jiang, a principal investigator working at the Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica. Because I work in a similar field, I am familiar with Jiang's work and publications, although I have never met him. New Threads contains several articles (urls provided) attacking Jiang personally, using many insulting words such as "idiot". It seems that some of the articles were written by someone who may have been an unsuccessful job candidate at Jiang's institute.

Disclosing scientific misconduct is not simply about free speech, as claimed by Fang. It is also about being professional, objective and serious. Only verified facts should be published on the website, if it is claiming to monitor incidents of scientific misconduct. It should not be used for unsubstantiated attacks in the name of free speech, not only because of the personal and professional effects on the scientists concerned, but also because readers, especially young students, could be misled.


Nature 442, 132(13 July 2006) | doi:10.1038/442132b; Published online 12 July 2006

Misconduct: China needs university ethics courses
Qizhi Wang

Department of Mechanics, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610065, China


Sir:
Your Special Report "Named and shamed" (Nature 441, 392–393; 2006) and Editorial "Finding fraud in China" (Nature 441, 549–550; 2006) report that scientific misconduct has become rampant in China, especially in universities. I would like to add my view to those of previous correspondents (Nature 441, 932; 2006).

Misconduct is hampering the sound development of science in the nation's higher-education system. If scientific misconduct cases are not handled by the university (or other concerned authority), and much-needed outside supervision is not available, then each occasion that comes to light damages the academic reputation of the university concerned, the whistleblower and the person accused.

Unfortunately, serious and justified investigations of suspected fraud have been largely ignored by China's universities, with the exceptions of the prestigious Tsinghua University and Shanghai Jiaotong University, each of which has recently dismissed a professor (returned from abroad in each case) for fabricating research achievements or results. However, details of these investigations have not been disclosed, so other universities cannot learn from them.

Obviously, it is the university involved in a fraud case — not the Ministry of Education, the media, websites, journals or newspapers — that has the power to dismiss or demote the accused, if guilty. A mechanism is needed to deal with such eventualities.

To cope with embarrassing situations such as those currently being highlighted in the media, I suggest that editorials and articles on the subject in science journals such as Nature and Science should be used as materials for teaching a course of research ethics to students in China's universities. Access to case studies being taught in scientific ethics courses elsewhere would also be valuable. Our universities should play a key part in fighting scientific misconduct, and every honest Chinese professor should make a contribution to such courses as part of providing a complete university education.





所有跟贴:
  • Wellcome to English Village Apartments - blackbox (58 bytes) 2006-7-12, 17:52:00
  • 美国的吴国盛经常性地流览一些新语丝的文章 - blackbox (18 bytes) 2006-7-12, 17:35:35
  • The authorship of the Nature letter is questionable - nini (373 bytes) 2006-7-13, 03:38:36
  • 湾湾的也在上面,哈哈 - 外行ultra (1204 bytes) 2006-7-12, 16:15:44
  • 呵呵, 吴教授这么好的信,跟湾湾的贴一拨发了 - Latino2 (0 bytes) 2006-7-12, 16:27:35
  • 这个Guosheng Wu 真没水平 - Enlighten (315 bytes) 2006-7-12, 15:08:42
  • 这种信编辑不修改的吗? - 外行ultra (14 bytes) 2006-7-12, 16:16:42
  • 有自己说了什么话然后不小心在另一场合扇自己嘴巴的。 - Enlighten (53 bytes) 2006-7-12, 15:14:24
  • Is prof. Wu a scientist? We consider him as a PSEUDO-scientist. - Latino2 (80 bytes) 2006-7-12, 15:03:59

    加跟贴

    笔名: 密码(可选项): 注册笔名请按这里

    标题:

    内容(可选项):

    URL(可选项):
    URL标题(可选项):
    图像(可选项):


    所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛http://www.xys.org/cgi-bin/mainpage.pl