How do you think LaCour was able to publish falsified data in such a prestigious journal as Science?
LaCour’s timing with his “findings” could not have been more perfect. I think that his false claims brought hopes back into people’s hearts and minds that everyone isn’t always “stuck in their old ways”; a little bit of talking and educating can completely change someone’s political beliefs despite what old studies suggested. Science saw the graduate student and his well accredited accomplice, Dr. Green, and just assummed that their data was falid. LaCour even went as far to say certain foundations funded their research in order to make the research sound even more valid. Given the timing of the study and the false assurances LaCour provided, I can see why Science may have made the mistake in assuming that it was a reliable study. To be the magazine that publishes a scientific study that proves people aren’t as stubborn minded about homosexuals and that change is possible is a huge publicity booster. While Science is a very distinguished magazine, they are a for profit magazine and money is not always out of the question when publishing research articles. I think they saw this as an opportunity to get more readers and took it.
What are the responsibilities of individuals who co-author papers? What can or should a student (graduate or undergraduate) do when co-author is suspected of falsifying data?
Individuals who co-author papers are generally supposed to help gather data with the primary author and other co-authors. To elaborate on that with this study in particular, they would survey the randomly selected 10,0000 participants and enter in their data. They would also help evaluate the data and help with the interpretations. This is based off of what my sister does as a graduate researcher here at Iowa State. If a student suspects that a co-author has falsified data, first, they should come forward to another person (professor or student) and tell them of their suspicions. Getting a second opinion is crucial because your curiousities could be stemmed from a biased perspective. If they also believe that is falsified, I believe directing your concerns to those involved with the study is the next step. Ask them how they did their study and what detailed procedures they followed to collect their data (the procedure should already be published, but hearing it from the source is always best). If they comply and tell you how the reserach was done, then using your judgement will come into play; turning it into IRB I think would be the best way to go if the data still seems suspicious.