Bullied in science: I quit my job and launched an advocacy non-profit

Morteza Mahmoudi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00706-4

IF: 64.8

2024-03-13

Nature

Abstract:Ahead of the Academic Parity Movement's annual conference, co-founder Morteza Mahmoudi describes how it supports whistle-blowers. Ahead of the Academic Parity Movement's annual conference, co-founder Morteza Mahmoudi describes how it supports whistle-blowers.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Distinguishing online academic bullying: identifying new forms of harassment in a dissenting Emeritus Professor's case

Travis Noakes,Tim Noakes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06326

IF: 3.776

2021-02-24

Heliyon

Abstract:The shift of academic discourse to an online space without guardians gives motivated academic cyberbullies an opportunity to harass susceptible recipients. Cyberbullying by higher education employees is a neglected phenomenon; despite the dangers it poses to academic free speech as well as other negative outcomes. In the absence of an adequate definition for Online Academic Bullying (OAB) as a surfacing threat, its' targets cannot readily gauge its severity or confidently report that they are victims. Nor do their attackers have a reference point for understanding and, perhaps, correcting their own incivility. To remedy this, we propose an analytical framework grounded in Routine Activity Theory (RAT) that can serve as an appropriate reporting instrument. The OABRAT framework is illustrated with an Emeritus Professor's case and the varied examples of cyber harassment that he experienced. This scientific influencer was relentlessly attacked on social media platforms by varied academics for expressing contrarian, but evidence-based, opinions. Spotlighting OAB's distinctive attacks should raise awareness amongst researchers and institutional policy makers. The reporting instrument may further assist with identifying and confronting this threat. This article also flags ethical concerns related to dissident scholars' usage of online platforms for informal, public debates. Such scholars may face an asymmetrical challenge in confronting cyber harassment from hypercritical academics and cybermobs on poorly moderated platforms. Universities should therefor consider appropriate countermeasures to protect both the public and their employees against victimisation by academic cyberbullies.
Harassed? Intimidated? Guidebook offers help to scientists under attack

Jeff Tollefson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-03104-y

IF: 64.8

2024-09-21

Nature

Abstract:Scholars provide tactics for responding to threats and abuse, but emphasize that institutions must defend their researchers. Scholars provide tactics for responding to threats and abuse, but emphasize that institutions must defend their researchers.

multidisciplinary sciences
Retrospective reflections of a whistleblower: opinions on misconduct responses

Mary Allen,Robin Dowell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822249

Abstract:Almost 10 years ago, when I was in my fourth year of graduate school, my fellow graduate students discovered that our thesis advisor had engaged in misconduct by falsifying and fabricating data in two grant applications. We informed the university and my advisor resigned. This event was a turning point in my life. Years later, I have gathered my thoughts and reflections on the experience. I believe we must first prevent what misconduct we can. But unfortunately some misconduct will still occur and in those circumstances we must respond to protect those affected by the misconduct and to progress beyond the event. In so doing, we get the most value out of scientific research.
Misconduct’s forgotten victims

H Holden Thorp,H. Holden Thorp

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adp2165

IF: 56.9

2024-03-22

Science

Abstract:The drumbeat of complaints over the poor treatment of graduate students and postdocs in academic science continues. As explained on this page, there is a seemingly endless “slow-motion crisis” of strikes, failures at collective bargaining, and damaging news stories about the mistreatment of and poor working conditions for graduate students. Meanwhile, a parade of stories about academic fraud and failures to address research integrity undermine public trust in science. These two threads are connected. Although media coverage of research misconduct tends to focus on the motives and actions of high-flying faculty members and their institutions, the casualties of such tumult are hardly mentioned: the trainees who may be traumatized personally and harmed professionally by the clumsy, opaque, and slow way that institutions deal with these incidents.

multidisciplinary sciences
Encouraging and Rewarding the Whistleblower in Research Misconduct Cases

Ian Freckelton

Abstract:There are many pressures that militate against work colleagues "blowing the whistle" or "ringing the bell" on each other in respect of research misconduct. These pressures result in a significant proportion of such conduct not coming to light at all or coming to light later or less straightforwardly than is desirable. There need to be meaningful incentives for colleagues to draw to the attention of authorities concerns that they have about adherence by others to their obligations in relation to research integrity. The United States has a distinctive process under the False Claims Act which provides significant financial encouragement to such persons, known as "relators" under the qui tam scheme, including in the context of proven research misconduct. This editorial reviews prominent occasions on which qui tam actions have been taken and considers the ramifications of a US$112.5 million settlement arrived at in 2019 involving research misconduct at Duke University. It discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the incentives that lie at the heart of the United States False Claims Act and canvasses whether it should be emulated in other countries.
Cultivating a Culture of Inclusivity in Heliophysics

Alexa Halford,A. G. Burrell,Michael W. Liemohn,McArthur Jones,Astrid Maute,T. I. Pulkkinen,Christopher Bard,Ryan McGranaghan,L. B. Wilson,R. C. Allen,Chuanfei Dong,S. K. Vines,Liang Wang,Niescja Turner,Katherine Garcia‐Sage,K. E. Mandt,J. Klenzing

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2023.1061683

IF: 3.718

2023-01-01

Frontiers in Physics

Abstract:A large number of heliophysicists from across career levels, institution types, and job titles came together to support a poster at Heliophysics 2050 and the position papers for the 2024 Heliophysics decadal survey titled “Cultivating a Culture of Inclusivity in Heliophysics,” “The Importance of Policies: It’s not just a pipeline problem,” and “Mentorship within Heliophysics.” While writing these position papers, the number of people who privately shared disturbing stories and experiences of bullying and harassment was shocking. The number of people who privately expressed how burned out they were was staggering. The number of people who privately spoke about how they considered leaving the field for their and their family’s health was astounding. And for as much good there is in our community, it is still a toxic environment for many. If we fail to do something now, our field will continue to suffer. While acknowledging the ongoing growth that we as individuals must work toward, we call on our colleagues to join us in working on organizational, group, and personal levels toward a truly inclusive culture, for the wellbeing of our colleagues and the success of our field. This work includes policies, processes, and commitments to promote: accountability for bad actors; financial security through removing the constant anxiety about funding; prioritization of mental health and community through removing constant deadlines and constant last-minute requests; a collaborative culture rather than a hyper-competitive one; and a community where people can thrive as whole persons and do not have to give up a healthy or well-rounded life to succeed.
Deep and fascinating insights into whistleblowing

Richard Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1147

2024-05-23

BMJ

Abstract:Why do people become whistleblowers? Why do most people not become whistleblowers? What becomes of whistleblowers? These are three of the questions that Carl Elliott, a professor of bioethics at the University of Minnesota, sets out to answer in the context of medical research in his beautifully written book The Occasional Human Sacrifice: Medical Experimentation and the Price of Saying No. (I suspect that the publisher rather than Elliott chose the title.)Elliott was inspired to try and answer these questions by his experience as a whistleblower against his own university. In June 2008 he read a newspaper account of the death by suicide of Dan Markingson. Markingson had been a participant in a clinical trial of an antipsychotic drug, Seroquel, funded by AstraZeneca. He had been experiencing full blown psychosis when admitted to the trial, raising questions about informed consent. His mother had not wanted him entered into the trial,...

medicine, general & internal
New legal aid fund for sleuths

Holly Else

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adp1968

IF: 56.9

2024-03-15

Science

Abstract:Investor pledges $1 million for science whistleblowers

multidisciplinary sciences
Prominent Geneticist Loses £3.5m Grant over Charges of Bullying

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3624

2018-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:The Wellcome Trust has withdrawn a £3.5m (€3.9m; $4.5m) research grant to a scientist at the Institute of Cancer Research after allegations of bullying were made against her.Nazneen Rahman, a prominent genetic researcher at the institute, resigned her position there after an investigation found that she had a case to answer. A law firm commissioned to investigate charges that were first laid against her by other staff members last November found sufficient evidence for the allegations to be reviewed by a disciplinary hearing.Rahman announced her …
Realizing the price of academic freedom

Upendra Chalise,D Ryan King

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpheart.00480.2023

2024-01-01

Abstract:Since 2010, the number of life science doctoral graduates opting into academic postdoctoral employment has steadily declined. In recent years, this decline has made routine headlines in academic news cycles, and faculty members, universities, and funding bodies alike have begun to take notice. In November 2022, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) convened a special interest group to address the problems in postdoctoral recruitment and retention. In response, the American Physiological Society Science Policy Committee highlighted several key issues in postdoctoral training and working conditions and offered the NIH solutions to consider. There are known issues that affect postdoctoral recruitment and retention efforts: low wages relative to other employment sectors, a heavy workload, and poor job prospects to name a few. Unfortunately, these concerns are frequently dismissed as "the price of doing business in academia," and postdoctoral scholars are promised that if they overcome the trials and tribulations of this training period, the reward at the end, a career with academic freedom to pursue your own interests, justifies the means. However, academic freedom cannot and should not be used as the band-aid in a system where most of us will never actually experience academic freedom. Instead, we should systematically embrace solutions that improve the personal and professional health of early career researchers in all levels of training and independence if the goal is to truly shore up the academic workforce.
Peer review bullying threatens diversity, equity, and inclusion

Farid Saleh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2024.09.001

IF: 20.589

2024-11-07

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

Abstract:Bullying during the peer review process is an overlooked form of academic bullying. Measures to limit its negative impact are insufficient, necessitating new initiatives to protect individuals and the integrity of science. If unaddressed, peer review bullying will undermine diversity, equity, and inclusion, particularly harming early-career researchers and minorities.

genetics & heredity,ecology,evolutionary biology
Editorial bullying: an exploration of acts impacting publication ethics and related environment

Fawad Javed,Dimitrios Michelogiannakis,P Emile Rossouw

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2024.1345553

2024-02-21

Abstract:Bullying and misconduct in the realm of scientific and scholarly publishing have the potential to jeopardize the transparency and integrity of academic discourse. While misconduct issues among authors have been extensively discussed, the role of editors in perpetuating or mitigating such problems has garnered less attention. Scientific publishing serves as the gateway for disseminating innovative research findings globally, and the role of editors, especially Editor/s-in-chief, is pivotal in safeguarding the rigor and credibility of published research. Editor bullying and misconduct involve behaviors that undermine the scientific process, compromise research integrity, and harm the careers and wellbeing of individuals. These actions may manifest as biased decision-making, suppression of dissenting voices, or the exploitation of power dynamics in the peer review process. To address these issues, preventive and therapeutic approaches are suggested, including enhancing awareness, recognizing and mitigating exacerbating factors, and upholding professionalism. Moreover, the importance of a conflict-of-interest declaration for editors is highlighted to ensure transparency and integrity in the editorial process. The present mini-review aims to shed light on editor bullying, illuminating its gravity and the urgency to address these issues within the academic publishing domain/s. This review underscores the more subtle, yet equally significant, issue of professional misconduct in the editorial realm of scientific journals.
Whistleblower epideictic and the rejuvenation of the fourth estate

Alan Chu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2023.2192497

2023-04-06

Quarterly Journal of Speech

Abstract:The historical partnership between whistleblowers and journalists has produced some of the most consequential news stories of the 20th and 21st centuries. However, this partnership has also experienced deep ruptures, most notably after the attacks on 9/11 that reordered the fourth estate's (the press) approach to publishing stories on national intelligence and politically powerful figures. While sensational developments in information accessibility such as WikiLeaks and online document repositories have meaningfully changed the activity of newsgathering and how stories are published, this article instead looks to the more delicate activity of whistleblower rhetoric and its role in recalibrating the place of the fourth estate in a liberal democracy. What follows is an analysis of how a small, vulnerable, and otherwise heterogeneous group uses a rhetoric of praise and blame to achieve a vision of the fourth estate's essential role in the world.

communication
Blow that whistle at your own risk

Sara Reardon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02743-5

IF: 64.8

2024-08-22

Nature

Abstract:Physician scientist Nancy Olivieri describes hard-won lessons from decades of fighting for scientific integrity. Physician scientist Nancy Olivieri describes hard-won lessons from decades of fighting for scientific integrity.

multidisciplinary sciences
Biologist returns after harassment suspension

Meredith Wadman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adr6186

IF: 56.9

2024-07-13

Science

Abstract:Bruce Blumberg's graduate student reported fleeing harrowing conference trip in Spain

multidisciplinary sciences
Rooting out scientific misconduct

Ivan Oransky,Barbara Redman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adn9352

IF: 56.9

2024-01-12

Science

Abstract:Scientific misconduct is an issue rife with controversy, from its forms and definitions to the policies that guide how allegations are handled. A survey published nearly 15 years ago reported that 2% of researchers said they had fabricated or falsified data in their published work. This is not just an academic issue. Fake data promote ineffective or even dangerous treatments, for example, and thwart the discovery of real solutions for society. In the United States, the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) is tasked with rooting out misconduct in research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Last October, ORI proposed changes to how it functions. The agency's recommendations—the first since 2005—have evoked mixed reactions, but the real problem is that ORI is underfunded and lacks the resources and authority needed to make a difference. Unless its charter is revised by Congress, the ORI can sadly do little more than tinker at the edges of scientific fraud.

multidisciplinary sciences
The need for the development of discipline-specific approaches to address academic bullying

Sherry Moss,Susanne Täuber,Shahriar Sharifi,Morteza Mahmoudi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101598

IF: 15.1

2022-08-03

EClinicalMedicine

Abstract:Background: It is now well-documented that academic bullying, mainly driven by power differences, affects all disciplines and academic people with various positions (from students to senior faculty) of all levels of experience. Our aim is to probe whether academic bullying, in its specific forms, manifests differently across disciplines. Methods: We analyzed discipline-specific data from our global survey on academic bullying, which was collected since November 2019. The survey was a cross-sectional global study that was administered via Qualtrics. It reflects responses from 2122 individuals whose participation was solicited through various means including advertisements in Science and Nature magazines and the American Chemical Society. Findings: The main finding is that academic bullying does not affect all scientific fields equally. Our cross-sectional global survey of targets of academic bullying indicates that bullying behavior depended strongly on the scientific discipline. Specifically, our comparison of the three major scientific categories, including Applied Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences revealed significant differences (p < 0.05) in four (out of ten) of the contextual behaviors. Further comparison of the bullying behavior among specific disciplines (e.g., Chemistry, Engineering, Life Sciences, Neuroscience, and Social Sciences) revealed significant differences (p < 0.05) in five of the contextual behaviors. We also noticed that, among the top five disciplines analyzed, respondents in Engineering experienced the highest rate of bullying behaviors. Interpretation: The variation in contextual bullying behavior across disciplines suggests the need for specific and nuanced training, monitoring, and actions by stakeholders in addressing academic bullying in a context-specific manner. Funding: None.
Harassment of scientists is surging — institutions aren't sure how to help

Bianca Nogrady

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01468-9

IF: 64.8

2024-05-22

Nature

Abstract:As researchers increasingly face many kinds of attack over their work, there is debate about how to support and protect them. As researchers increasingly face many kinds of attack over their work, there is debate about how to support and protect them.

multidisciplinary sciences
Towards a more sustainable academic publishing system

Mohsen Kayal,Jane Ballard,Ehsan Kayal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24908/iee.2021.14.3.f

2021-01-18

Abstract:Communicating new scientific discoveries is key to human progress. Yet, this endeavor is hindered by monetary restrictions for publishing one's findings and accessing other scientists' reports. This process is further exacerbated by a large portion of publishing media owned by private, for-profit companies that do not reinject academic publishing benefits into the scientific community, in contrast with journals from scientific societies. As the academic world is not exempt from economic crises, new alternatives are necessary to support a fair publishing system for society. After summarizing the general issues of academic publishing today, we present several solutions at the levels of the individual scientist, the scientific community, and the publisher towards more sustainable scientific publishing. By providing a voice to the many scientists who are fundamental protagonists, yet often powerless witnesses, of the academic publishing system, and a roadmap for implementing solutions, this initiative can spark increased awareness and promote shifts towards impactful practices.

General Economics
Promoting and Supporting Innovation Through Collaborative Research

Jim Gentile

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.26.1_supplement.617.1

2012-04-01

The FASEB Journal

Abstract:Many of the major scientific challenges of the 21st century are likely to require collaborative and interdisciplinary teams. Creating good “team players” who can work synergistically to undertake high‐risk, high‐reward research should be a priority, and demonstrating success in collaborations should be encouraged by private and federal granting agencies, and more highly rewarded by universities in tenure and promotion decisions. Given the challenges that our nation faces, tenure and promotion decisions should no longer be based merely on the number of papers published or overhead dollars generated. Journal editorial boards and foundation peer‐review panels are essential to the highest‐quality science, but they should not be viewed as surrogate members of tenure and promotion committees. Rewarding careers paths should be clearly visible to the nation's newly minted science Ph.D.s, postdoctoral researchers and “tenure track” professors. Allowing these early‐career scientists more expansive opportunities during their most creative years would make the United States, and the academic communities in which they serve, an increasingly more vibrant and creative environments. The heart and soul of American science and enterprise is the willingness to take risks, to learn from failure and to repeat the process until success is achieved. Our early‐career scientists should have the same opportunity.

cell biology,biochemistry & molecular biology,biology

Bullied in science: I quit my job and launched an advocacy non-profit

Distinguishing online academic bullying: identifying new forms of harassment in a dissenting Emeritus Professor's case

Harassed? Intimidated? Guidebook offers help to scientists under attack

Retrospective reflections of a whistleblower: opinions on misconduct responses

Misconduct’s forgotten victims

Encouraging and Rewarding the Whistleblower in Research Misconduct Cases

Cultivating a Culture of Inclusivity in Heliophysics

Deep and fascinating insights into whistleblowing

New legal aid fund for sleuths

Prominent Geneticist Loses £3.5m Grant over Charges of Bullying

Realizing the price of academic freedom

Peer review bullying threatens diversity, equity, and inclusion

Editorial bullying: an exploration of acts impacting publication ethics and related environment

Whistleblower epideictic and the rejuvenation of the fourth estate

Blow that whistle at your own risk

Biologist returns after harassment suspension

Rooting out scientific misconduct

The need for the development of discipline-specific approaches to address academic bullying

Harassment of scientists is surging — institutions aren't sure how to help

Towards a more sustainable academic publishing system

Promoting and Supporting Innovation Through Collaborative Research