He is unlucky
- 主题发起人 Iiris
- 开始时间
- 注册
- 2011-02-04
- 消息
- 5,957
- 荣誉分数
- 992
- 声望点数
- 173
Top Canadian scientist and award-winning student caught in ‘blatant plagiarism’ of text
Margaret Munro, Postmedia News | Sep 11, 2012 7:48 PM ET | Last Updated: Sep 12, 2012 9:23 AM ET
More from Postmedia News
HandoutsDongqing Li and Yasaman Daghighi have retracted their report about advances in lab-on-a-chip technology after accusations of plagiarism.
Twitter Google+ LinkedIn Email Comments More
In what is being described as a case of “blatant plagiarism,” a top Canadian scientist and one of his students have issued a retraction for using text and figures that originated with leading United States researchers.
Dongqing Li, who holds a prestigious Canada research chair at the University of Waterloo, and Yasaman Daghighi, an award-winning student nearing completion of her PhD in engineering, have retracted a report about advances in lab-on-a-chip technology.
Related
University of Alberta medical school dean resigns after plagiarizing speech
Should Saskatchewan students be punished for plagiarism?
The retraction says their report took “unaltered text” from a research paper by scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California, Santa Barbara. Li and Daghighi also failed to provide “appropriate references” for “a few reproduced figures,” it says.
Li and Daghighi, who teach engineering at Waterloo, did not respond to requests for interviews.
University of Waterloo officials, who actively urge their students and staff to stand up for academic integrity, will say nothing about the case involving one of the university’s most celebrated researchers. Li, who is devising hand-held diagnostic devises for use in biomedical and environmental testing, has received more than $2 million in federal science grants and has been promised another $700,000.
The university is not commenting on the case “because of privacy concerns,” Ellen Réthoré, Waterloo’s associate vice-president of communications and public affairs, told Postmedia News by email on Tuesday.
A good chunk of it was a cut-and-paste job
Federal research agencies are also silent on the case, which has generated attention in the U.S., where the retraction was recently uncovered by Retraction Watch. The group shines light on one of the darker corners of academia by tracking corrections and retractions in the research literature.
“Plagiarism costs Canadian lab-on-a-chip researcher a paper,” the website says.
In a strange twist, it says that Li and Daghighi appear to have plagiarized the U.S. report before it was even published, then published their paper in a journal Li was editing.
“Daghighi was then his graduate student, and it’s pretty easy to see him assuring her of a plum publication,” Adam Marcus of Retraction Watch writes. “What’s less clear is how either of the authors might have gotten their hands on a pre-publication version of (the U.S.) paper that appeared in a different journal.”
“There are a lot of fishy aspects to the whole thing,” Martin Bazant, associate professor of chemical engineering and mathematics at MIT, said when contacted by Postmedia News.
Bazant, who heads a team that has made headlines for its work on lab-on-a-chip and advanced battery technology, was lead author of the U.S. paper. He says it was “blatantly plagiarized” by the Waterloo researchers.
Plagiarism is defined as the presenting of ideas, words or intellectual property of another as one’s own. “Plagiarism is a very serious academic offence and can result in expulsion from the University,” say Waterloo’s academic regulations.
“Academic Integrity is the cornerstone of research, teaching, and learning,” says Waterloo’s office of academic integrity. “Members of the University of Waterloo community are expected to personally demonstrate academic integrity in their work.”
Bazant says he happened on the Waterloo report in the science journal called Microfluidics and Nanofluidics while browsing the scientific literature in 2011.
The Waterloo report has the same title, “Induced-charge electrokinetic phenomena,” as a report Bazant and his colleague Todd Squires in California published in the journal Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science. The 19-page Waterloo report has a similar outline, uses some of the same figures and contains tracts of identical text.
Dongqing Li declared himself that he regards this case clearly being plagiarism
“A good chunk of it was a cut-and-paste job,” says Bazant.
Li and Daghighi’s report states that it was submitted for publication on Jan. 15, 2010, two weeks before Bazant and Squires’ report was published on-line on Jan. 28, 2010.
Bazant says he is still puzzled over how Li and Daghighi got a hold of his report, but says he may have posted a copy on his MIT website, after the paper was accepted for publication on Jan. 11, 2010.
Bazant notified University of Waterloo engineering dean Pearl Sullivan about what he described to her as “plagiarism and abuse of editorial privilege” in April 2012 “as a professional courtesy.” He also contacted the journal and asked for a retraction.
Li was founding editor of Microfluidics and Nanofluidics, one of several journals in the field of nanotechnology, in which researchers compete to be first with advances and publications.
The journal published Li and Daghighi’s one-paragraph retraction this summer. It says “unaltered text was taken from a pre-published version” of Bazant and Squires’ 2010 report. “Moreover, a few reproduced figures from other published articles lack appropriate references. The authors apologize for their negligence.”
Li has stepped down as editor-in-chief of the journal, and now sits on the editorial board. The new editor, Roland Zengerle, at the University of Freiburg in Germany, says two members of the editorial board investigated the case.
They came to the conclusion “that the amount of text taken over from Bazant’s paper should be regarded as plagiarism, but there was no evidence that Yasaman Daghighi or Prof. Li falsified submission dates,” Zengerle said by email. He say about eight per cent of Li and Daghighi’s report was “not cited correctly.”
“The Editorial Board was told, that Yasaman Daghighi saw a preprint of Prof. Bazant’s review paper on his website in March 2010 and obtained the text that way,” says Zengerle.
“Dongqing Li declared himself that he regards this case clearly being plagiarism,” Zengerle said. “He was not aware of it at the time the paper was submitted or revised, but as senior author he took responsibility and declared that he should have checked more carefully.”
Zengele said the investigators found that two critical sections were added when Daghighi prepared revisions of the Li-Daghighi manuscript in March 2010 after it was peer-reviewed. But “Two other critical sections were already in the manuscript before it went to the review process,” Zengele said.
The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the country’s biggest science funder, has awarded Li more than $2 million in federal science grants since 1992. He was appointed a Canada research chair in 2009, which comes with $200,000 in federal funding annually for seven years along with $360,000 for “research infrastructure” from the Canada Foundation for Innovation.
NSERC would not to comment on the Waterloo case, saying the federal Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research, which was created last year, is now handling allegations about cases of misconduct. Suzanne Zimmerman, executive director of the secretariat, said she does not comment on cases that are reported in the media or are under review.
Margaret Munro, Postmedia News | Sep 11, 2012 7:48 PM ET | Last Updated: Sep 12, 2012 9:23 AM ET
More from Postmedia News
HandoutsDongqing Li and Yasaman Daghighi have retracted their report about advances in lab-on-a-chip technology after accusations of plagiarism.
Twitter Google+ LinkedIn Email Comments More
In what is being described as a case of “blatant plagiarism,” a top Canadian scientist and one of his students have issued a retraction for using text and figures that originated with leading United States researchers.
Dongqing Li, who holds a prestigious Canada research chair at the University of Waterloo, and Yasaman Daghighi, an award-winning student nearing completion of her PhD in engineering, have retracted a report about advances in lab-on-a-chip technology.
Related
University of Alberta medical school dean resigns after plagiarizing speech
Should Saskatchewan students be punished for plagiarism?
The retraction says their report took “unaltered text” from a research paper by scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California, Santa Barbara. Li and Daghighi also failed to provide “appropriate references” for “a few reproduced figures,” it says.
Li and Daghighi, who teach engineering at Waterloo, did not respond to requests for interviews.
University of Waterloo officials, who actively urge their students and staff to stand up for academic integrity, will say nothing about the case involving one of the university’s most celebrated researchers. Li, who is devising hand-held diagnostic devises for use in biomedical and environmental testing, has received more than $2 million in federal science grants and has been promised another $700,000.
The university is not commenting on the case “because of privacy concerns,” Ellen Réthoré, Waterloo’s associate vice-president of communications and public affairs, told Postmedia News by email on Tuesday.
A good chunk of it was a cut-and-paste job
Federal research agencies are also silent on the case, which has generated attention in the U.S., where the retraction was recently uncovered by Retraction Watch. The group shines light on one of the darker corners of academia by tracking corrections and retractions in the research literature.
“Plagiarism costs Canadian lab-on-a-chip researcher a paper,” the website says.
In a strange twist, it says that Li and Daghighi appear to have plagiarized the U.S. report before it was even published, then published their paper in a journal Li was editing.
“Daghighi was then his graduate student, and it’s pretty easy to see him assuring her of a plum publication,” Adam Marcus of Retraction Watch writes. “What’s less clear is how either of the authors might have gotten their hands on a pre-publication version of (the U.S.) paper that appeared in a different journal.”
“There are a lot of fishy aspects to the whole thing,” Martin Bazant, associate professor of chemical engineering and mathematics at MIT, said when contacted by Postmedia News.
Bazant, who heads a team that has made headlines for its work on lab-on-a-chip and advanced battery technology, was lead author of the U.S. paper. He says it was “blatantly plagiarized” by the Waterloo researchers.
Plagiarism is defined as the presenting of ideas, words or intellectual property of another as one’s own. “Plagiarism is a very serious academic offence and can result in expulsion from the University,” say Waterloo’s academic regulations.
“Academic Integrity is the cornerstone of research, teaching, and learning,” says Waterloo’s office of academic integrity. “Members of the University of Waterloo community are expected to personally demonstrate academic integrity in their work.”
Bazant says he happened on the Waterloo report in the science journal called Microfluidics and Nanofluidics while browsing the scientific literature in 2011.
The Waterloo report has the same title, “Induced-charge electrokinetic phenomena,” as a report Bazant and his colleague Todd Squires in California published in the journal Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science. The 19-page Waterloo report has a similar outline, uses some of the same figures and contains tracts of identical text.
Dongqing Li declared himself that he regards this case clearly being plagiarism
“A good chunk of it was a cut-and-paste job,” says Bazant.
Li and Daghighi’s report states that it was submitted for publication on Jan. 15, 2010, two weeks before Bazant and Squires’ report was published on-line on Jan. 28, 2010.
Bazant says he is still puzzled over how Li and Daghighi got a hold of his report, but says he may have posted a copy on his MIT website, after the paper was accepted for publication on Jan. 11, 2010.
Bazant notified University of Waterloo engineering dean Pearl Sullivan about what he described to her as “plagiarism and abuse of editorial privilege” in April 2012 “as a professional courtesy.” He also contacted the journal and asked for a retraction.
Li was founding editor of Microfluidics and Nanofluidics, one of several journals in the field of nanotechnology, in which researchers compete to be first with advances and publications.
The journal published Li and Daghighi’s one-paragraph retraction this summer. It says “unaltered text was taken from a pre-published version” of Bazant and Squires’ 2010 report. “Moreover, a few reproduced figures from other published articles lack appropriate references. The authors apologize for their negligence.”
Li has stepped down as editor-in-chief of the journal, and now sits on the editorial board. The new editor, Roland Zengerle, at the University of Freiburg in Germany, says two members of the editorial board investigated the case.
They came to the conclusion “that the amount of text taken over from Bazant’s paper should be regarded as plagiarism, but there was no evidence that Yasaman Daghighi or Prof. Li falsified submission dates,” Zengerle said by email. He say about eight per cent of Li and Daghighi’s report was “not cited correctly.”
“The Editorial Board was told, that Yasaman Daghighi saw a preprint of Prof. Bazant’s review paper on his website in March 2010 and obtained the text that way,” says Zengerle.
“Dongqing Li declared himself that he regards this case clearly being plagiarism,” Zengerle said. “He was not aware of it at the time the paper was submitted or revised, but as senior author he took responsibility and declared that he should have checked more carefully.”
Zengele said the investigators found that two critical sections were added when Daghighi prepared revisions of the Li-Daghighi manuscript in March 2010 after it was peer-reviewed. But “Two other critical sections were already in the manuscript before it went to the review process,” Zengele said.
The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the country’s biggest science funder, has awarded Li more than $2 million in federal science grants since 1992. He was appointed a Canada research chair in 2009, which comes with $200,000 in federal funding annually for seven years along with $360,000 for “research infrastructure” from the Canada Foundation for Innovation.
NSERC would not to comment on the Waterloo case, saying the federal Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research, which was created last year, is now handling allegations about cases of misconduct. Suzanne Zimmerman, executive director of the secretariat, said she does not comment on cases that are reported in the media or are under review.
Newland
知名会员
- 注册
- 2010-10-01
- 消息
- 781
- 荣誉分数
- 121
- 声望点数
- 103
去年还有一个是哈医大“千人计划”学者王志国教授
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/life/h...uct-allegations/article600396/?service=mobile
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/life/h...uct-allegations/article600396/?service=mobile
- 注册
- 2012-08-25
- 消息
- 959
- 荣誉分数
- 178
- 声望点数
- 53
In a strange twist, it says that Li and Daghighi appear to have plagiarized the U.S. report before it was even published, then published their paper in a journal Li was editing.
-------------------------------------
即便Li 是这本 journal 的editor ，他也是不可能review有自己署名的文章，至少还需另外两个人review才能放行，再说现在有那万能的谷歌，还有人敢干这种蠢事。
-------------------------------------
即便Li 是这本 journal 的editor ，他也是不可能review有自己署名的文章，至少还需另外两个人review才能放行，再说现在有那万能的谷歌，还有人敢干这种蠢事。
我觉得比这严重。
相关推荐
