Former researcher committed misconduct by plagiarizing figure
University of Arizona says former researcher committed misconduct by plagiarizing figure
Palash Gangopadhyay former researcher in the University of Arizona’s optics school engaged in “a serious case of research misconduct,” has learned.
Palash Gangopadhyay, who until 2019 was a research scientist at Arizona, used a figure from a when he co-authored a 2018 paper in Optics Letters titled “High sensitivity magnetometer using nanocomposite polymers with large magneto-optic response,” Wyant College of Optical Sciences dean Thomas Koch wrote to colleagues in an email. The 2003 paper appeared in an obstetrics journal.
Figure 4b of 2018 paper From Figure 3 of 2003 paper The 2018 paper has been cited nine times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science. Koch wrote:Graphically overlaying the figures makes the plagiarism readily apparent, even including replication of details near the noise floor. The falsification is made yet more unambiguous upon recognizing that the plagiarized figure displays the complex pattern from the simultaneous heartbeats of a fetus and mother as opposed to the pattern of an individual heartbeat. The senior authors of the Optics Letter paper have recently submitted a request to the Editor of Optics Letters to retract the publication. Gangopadhyay didn’t have any comment on the retraction.
Plagiarizing figure by former researcher committed misconduct
University of Arizona researcher
The company where he now also said that he does not have any comment. Koch’s email continued:
The purpose of this note is to make you aware of this set of events in a transparent fashion. This is a most unfortunate circumstance not only for the authors of the paper, but also for the reputation of Wyant College of Optical Sciences both within the scientific community and among the sponsors of our research. This note is also intended to raise your awareness of the potential for research misconduct among your peers, and these events illustrate the possible negative consequences of inadequate oversight of research.
Gangopadhyay says when a remarkable, high-impact result is achieved in a group effort, I believe that it is incumbent upon the collaborators to understand the procedures associated with achieving the remarkable result – perhaps as a witness for a well-advised reality check, but also because insights can always be gained from additional perspectives to further optimizing procedures and results. Palash concluded:
I am hopeful that the longstanding reputation of scientific integrity and strong technological impact that the Wyant College of Optical Sciences has earned will not be unduly tarnished by this case of research misconduct. I also hope that we all can learn a lesson from this – in particular, that it could happen to any of us if we get too disconnected from the front lines of the science and technology that we are championing.
University of Arizona College of Scientific Research Study Reports
Ivan Categories physics retractions, plagiarism thoughts on “Exclusive: University of Arizona says former researcher committed misconduct by plagiarizing figure”
As for the research misconduct, the terrible consequences of inadequate behavior induced two major things. First, it is dishonesty and kidnaps our faith in the truth. Second, it is bad for scientific development. We should shame on this misconduct behavior.
Bill:How do these characters always seem to end up with good (and presumably well-paid) positions
with technology companies?
Scientist says that’s an easy one to answer. because they published what I presume to be a prestigious journal, even if its crap they are publishing.
University of Arizona Misconduct
Publishing in a good journal is the sure sign of scientific competence, and if you don’t do that you must be a failed scientist and maybe. I predict a time in the not to distance future where only the liars with unbelievable publication records can get good jobs in academia and industry.
Scientific Research in Arizona
Bart, New York: Kudos to Dean for his honest remarks. Not all university administrators act likewise, even in the face of indistinguishable transgressions as those reported here, especially when money changes hands. Fiber Optics and The Journal of Science Practice and Integrity. The advantage in scientific research Scientific Research in Education by National Research Council notes these things in their studies.
Researchers, historians, and philosophers of science have debated the nature of scientific research in education for more than 100 years.
Recent enthusiasm for” evidence-based” policy and practice in education” now codified in the federal law that authorizes the bulk of research and scientific educational research. Ethically, the Ethics of Scientific research mentioned that Challenging long-held theories of scientific rationality and remoteness, Shrader argues that research cannot be ‘value free.’ Rather, any research will raise important moral issues for those involved, issues not only of truthfulness but of risk. Finally, there is also data that should be noted regarding Transforming education into an evidence-based field depends in no small part on a strong base of scientific knowledge to inform educational policy and practice.
Scientific Educational research at Universities U of AZ and University of Arizona makes select recommendations for strengthening scientific integrity on an ongoing basis.