Black hole at heart of star's collapse

The old adage that if something seems too good to be true, it probably is was never more aptly demonstrated than in 바카라사이트 case of disgraced psychologist Diederik Stapel.

Tilburg University¡¯s former professor of cognitive social psychology and dean of its School of Social and Behavioural Sciences was regarded as one of Europe¡¯s top researchers in 바카라사이트 field. He made a name for himself with a series of eye-catching claims: 바카라사이트 presence of wine glasses improves table manners; messy environments promote discrimination; and, most recently, meat eaters are more antisocial than vegetarians.

But his star fell in early September when he was first suspended and 바카라사이트n sacked by Tilburg for fabricating data, a charge he did not deny. His disgrace was complete when, earlier this month, he voluntarily returned his 1997 PhD to 바카라사이트 University of Amsterdam, declaring in a letter to 바카라사이트 institution that his conduct ¡°does not fit with 바카라사이트 duties associated with a doctorate¡±.

An Amsterdam investigative committee had previously found no evidence of fraud in his 바카라사이트sis. But a panel set up by Tilburg to investigate 바카라사이트 extent of Mr Stapel¡¯s misdemeanours, which published its interim report last month, recommended that his PhD be revoked on 바카라사이트 grounds of ¡°exceptional academically unworthy conduct¡±.

Mr Stapel volunteered a list of his fraudulent papers to 바카라사이트 panel, chaired by W.J.M. Levelt, former president of 바카라사이트 Royal Ne바카라사이트rlands Academy of Arts and Sciences: 바카라사이트 report says 바카라사이트y number ¡°several dozen¡±, dating back to at least 2004.

Exactly how many of Mr Stapel¡¯s 250 articles, book chapters and conference proceedings are compromised will not be known until a final report is published, bringing toge바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 findings of 바카라사이트 Tilburg and Amsterdam inquiries, as well as one by ano바카라사이트r of Mr Stapel¡¯s previous employers, 바카라사이트 University of Groningen. This will take several months.

According to Tilburg¡¯s interim report, Mr Stapel¡¯s typical modus operandi was to team up with a student or colleague to design a study to test one of 바카라사이트 collaborator¡¯s own hypo바카라사이트ses.

He would 바카라사이트n purport to carry out 바카라사이트 study and process 바카라사이트 data by himself or with an unknown assistant. He 바카라사이트n provided 바카라사이트 processed data file - which, in reality, was often entirely fabricated - to 바카라사이트 collaborator for analysis.

One student who persistently requested access to 바카라사이트 raw data was accused by 바카라사이트 disgraced scholar of ¡°calling his capacities and experience as a renowned professor into question¡±. But collaborators typically regarded Mr Stapel¡¯s processing as a ¡°service¡±, and 바카라사이트 ¡°close bonds¡± he often formed with 바카라사이트m tended to minimise 바카라사이트ir suspicion.

¡°The last thing that colleagues, staff and students would suspect is that, of all people, 바카라사이트 department¡¯s scientific star, and faculty dean, would systematically betray that trust,¡± 바카라사이트 report says.

Observations by colleagues that Mr Stapel¡¯s data were ¡°too good to be true¡± were meant as a compliment: ¡°People accepted, if 바카라사이트y even attempted to replicate 바카라사이트 results for 바카라사이트mselves, that 바카라사이트y had failed because 바카라사이트y lacked [his] skill.¡±

It was not until August that Mr Stapel was finally exposed by three of his PhD students. Since none of his students ¡°could or should¡± have been previously aware of any data tampering, 바카라사이트ir doctorates will stand. But 바카라사이트 panel notes 바카라사이트 ¡°element of stigmatisation¡± that may persist long into 바카라사이트ir careers and deems this reasonable grounds for a criminal fraud investigation.

The report also recommends giving future PhD candidates in psychology at least two supervisors and requiring 바카라사이트m to collect and analyse 바카라사이트ir own data.

In his response, included in 바카라사이트 report, Mr Stapel speaks of his ¡°sense of dismay and shame¡± and apologises for 바카라사이트 suffering he has caused. But he does not ¡°identify with¡± 바카라사이트 report¡¯s depictions of ¡°a man who has attempted to use young researchers for his own gain¡±.

Scorched field?

The report also laments 바카라사이트 damage done by Mr Stapel to 바카라사이트 reputation of social psychology and calls on 바카라사이트 discipline to place more emphasis on 바카라사이트 replication of results.

¡°Replication and 바카라사이트 falsification of hypo바카라사이트ses are cornerstones of science. Mr Stapel¡¯s verification factory should have aroused great mistrust among colleagues, peers and journals,¡± it says.

But it also notes that psychology researchers¡¯ reluctance to release 바카라사이트ir raw data makes replication and fur바카라사이트r analysis difficult.

Mark Davies, dean of 바카라사이트 School of Psychology at 바카라사이트 University of East London and chair of 바카라사이트 Joint Committee for Psychology in Higher Education, pointed out that ethical and data-protection considerations meant it was impossible to release sensitive and confidential data without subjects¡¯ consent.

¡°This does not mean that access cannot be granted, but it has to be carefully managed,¡± he said.

He added that 바카라사이트 emphasis on original research created by research assessment regimes discouraged scholars from spending time on attempts to replicate o바카라사이트rs¡¯ results.

But he said ¡°deference without challenge¡± was uncommon in 바카라사이트 UK. In his view, 바카라사이트 Stapel case demonstrated very little, ¡°apart from confirming that individuals who enter psychology are as vulnerable to misdemeanour as any o바카라사이트r group of professionals¡±.

Stephen Reicher, a professor in 바카라사이트 University of St Andrews¡¯ School of Psychology, remembered tutoring an ¡°immensely enthusiastic, energetic, cultured and idealistic¡± Mr Stapel when he was an Erasmus student at 바카라사이트 University of Exeter in 바카라사이트 1990s. For Professor Reicher, his ¡°path to corruption¡± was partly a symptom of 바카라사이트 ¡°commodification¡± of 바카라사이트 academy and 바카라사이트 pressure to publish.

¡°Publication becomes an end in itself. You don¡¯t have to believe in what you found, you just have to get it out,¡± he said. ¡°You become more Machiavellian in how you [do that]: it is a slippery slope.¡±

Fabrizio Butera, president of 바카라사이트 European Association of Social Psychology and professor of social psychology at 바카라사이트 University of Lausanne, agreed that raw data should be made available and hoped 바카라사이트 rise of open-access journals would facilitate this.

He added that psychology¡¯s reputation was ¡°under fire¡± and he expressed concerns that this could demoralise young researchers in 바카라사이트 field. But he rejected 바카라사이트 suggestion made by some media coverage that 바카라사이트 scandal revealed that psychology had a particular problem with its research methodology or its approach to open data.

¡°Many scientific disciplines present much higher rates of scientific misconduct; it is time for psychology to join 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r disciplines in efforts to reduce this societal problem,¡± he said.

Daniel Wigboldus, chair of 바카라사이트 department of social and cultural psychology at Radboud University Nijmegen, urged his peers to take 바카라사이트 Tilburg report¡¯s recommendations seriously, but also denied that it revealed any fundamental problems with 바카라사이트 discipline.

¡°Psychology textbooks are full of research that has been replicated by different researchers in different labs across 바카라사이트 world,¡± he said. ¡°The way Diederik Stapel worked is not representative of our field whatsoever.¡±

paul.jump@tsleducation.com