This has been the case for decades.

At the same time, knowing someone who committed academic fraud during his PhD and was caught, I can say two things:

A lot of people do it when they simply don't need to. They're not trying to "survive in academia". They're trying to get to the top. The person in question was smart, bright, and did good research (at least excluding the stuff he made up). He could have gotten an academic position without committing fraud. And he could have had a great industry job without it too.

No matter - he simply switched to another top tier university, got his PhD, and is now running a startup. Which comes to the second point: The repercussions are minor even when you do get caught.

▲

anishrverma 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

This is what makes the problem feel so systemic, in that weak consequences after the fact, and weak incentives for transparency before the fact. If the system mostly rewards output and prestige, then misconduct can remain a high-upside bet. We should be building research infrastructure that makes review trails, contribution, and verification more visible much earlier. That is part of what Liberata is aiming at, if of interest: https://liberata.info/beta-signup

	▲	11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

justinclift 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> and was caught

Was it made public?

▲

BeetleB 3 days ago | parent [-]

No - It was kept within the team and he was "fired" from the research group. Word got around and all the professors in the department (in the same field) knew (as did their students), so he couldn't just find another professor.

So he switched universities.

But still, didn't he worry that he'd bump into his former professor at a conference and that he would tell his new advisor? I don't know if he made some deal with him ...

	▲	glitchc 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That same professor will happily take money from the student's startup to conduct research assuming it is successful and has funds to spare. That should tell you right there how the incentives are aligned.
	▲	justinclift 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		My read of that is it's them not making it public being the enabler, and allowing that individual to do as you've said -> keep on going elsewhere.