Freiburg rescinds habilitation in sports medicine

The University of Freiburg in Germany recently rescinded the habilitation of Hans-Hermann Dickhuth, a professor of sports medicine who had been embroiled in a doping scandal (and eventually cleared) before he retired in 2012. The Badische Zeitung reported on October 14, 2013 (after some speculation on March 3) that the 30-year-old second dissertation had been found to be over 90% identical in text, figures and data to dissertations that were also prepared at that university. The seven dissertations, some of them quite slim volumes, also share large portions of text and data.

In comments to an editorial from October 19, 2013 in the Badische Zeitung, Dickhuth's son protests against his father being put in the stocks, as it were. Apparently, Dickhuth grew weary of the investigation and threatened to investigate the habilitations of the members of the committee, which may or may not have influenced their decision. Dickhuth has threatened more legal action, apparently the university has already spent about a half a million Euros on legal fees on this case alone.

The was the first time that the habilitation committee decided on rescinding a habilitation; at least two of the doctorates have been referred to the doctorate committee for investigation. Freiburg also has two current plagiarism cases, Gjb and Tmu, that are being investigated.

Update: Spiegel Online reports on Sept. 15, 2014 that the university has finally decided to rescind the habilitation, but not to strip Dickhuth of his professorship (and thus his pension), as he faithfully fulfilled his duties as a professor for many years. He is now retired.
I wrote to the university to see what's up with the other cases, they report that they are still "investigating". This, after having a more-or-less complete plagiarism documentation delivered to their door, so to speak. The universities are dragging their feet, hoping everything will go away, instead of vehemently defending academic standards. What a sorry state of affairs.

Plagiarism Detection Software Test 2013

Today I released the results of the Plagiarism Detection Software Test 2013. The report is available online, as are the individual results. Spiegel online reported on the test, including a picture of the home pages of the systems and the company response to the results, if the company cared to answer. We also offer the companies the opportunity to send us their comments on the test, we are glad to publish them.

The results can be summed up rather simply:

So-called plagiarism detection software does not detect plagiarism. In general, it can only demonstrate text parallels. The decision as to whether a text is plagiarism or not must solely rest with the educator using the software: It is only a tool, not an absolute test.

If a university decides to use plagiarism detection software, they need to have a clear policy on why they are using the software and how they will react to the results. It would be good to set up a competence team that offers educators help in testing suspicious texts, and to perhaps have two systems on offer, as the systems find different sources for different parts of the same source. 

German University Revokes venia legendi

The WHU - Otto Beisheim School of Management in Vallendar is reported to have decided to revoke the venia legendi, the right to teach that is conferred with a habilitation, of Ulrich Lichtenthaler, according to the Rhein-Zeitung. He was a young shooting-star who received both a doctorate and the venia legendi from the WHU after studying in Bamberg and Grenada, according to his Wikipedia entry. At 30, the Rhein-Zeitung reports, Lichtenthaler was made professor and since 2011 he has been a professor at the University of Mannheim.

In 2012 Strategic Organization retracted a paper by Lichtenthaler and Ernst at the author's request. In a comment on the StrategicProfs.net blog an editor notes that Lichtenthaler contacted the journal proactively and claims responsibility for the statistical errors. Retraction Watch picked up the story, noting that two more papers in Research Policy by Lichtenthaler had also been retracted. Research Policy gives a very detailed reason for the retraction: not only were there statistical problems, but the journal was also misled in that "the author failed to disclose (through specific citations, or through a mention in the 'acknowledgements' section, or in a covering letter to the Editor)  the existence of other closely related papers by the same author." The journal Research Policy has published a paper on the role of retractions in the scientific community and more recently one by editor Ben Martin on the problems of plagiarism, self-plagiarism and coercive citation in research assessment. Both WHU and the University of Mannheim began investigations into Lichtenthaler's research, Retraction Watch notes.

Retraction Watch continued keeping score:

• One month later, Strategic Management Journal retracted another paper. 
• Retraction five was documented a week later, from Journal of World Business.
• Three days later, retraction six from the Journal of Management Studies is found, it was first reported by the OpenInnovation blog.  
• Holger Ernst, the doctoral and habilitation advisor and frequent co-author of the now-retracted papers, was removed as second author from a paper on Journal of Product Innovation Management.
• In November 2012, Organization Science reported on retraction seven.
• A few days later, Retraction Watch found retraction eight on the Journal of Business Venturing. That journal notes a familiar pattern: statistical irregularities and multiple publication.
• Number nine was from the journal Technological Forecasting and Social Change. OpenInnovation  noted that they had previously thought this paper to be ripe for retraction.
• The Journal of Product Innovation Management now retracted #10 and #11.
• The twelfth retraction was noted in May 2013, from the journal Industrial and Corporate Change.

A press release by the WHU on Sept. 13, 2013 states that the investigation has now been completed and the habilitation rescinded. The press release notes that the decision to revoke the venia legendi was taken unanimously.

The University of Mannheim is on record from July 31, 2013, stating that they can't really say anything on account of data privacy, but that their own investigation is continuing.

This is an interesting dilemma currently confronting German universities. Although publications are openly seen to be plagiarized, published multiple times, withdrawn - the university treats the case as if it was an internal, disciplinary matter. Of course, they are afraid of lawsuits in the increasingly litigious German society. But still: academic matters are published matters, and the discussions about them should be public and not under the threat of lawsuits. It will be interesting to see what the university decides, as a venia legendi is still generally a requirement for obtaining a university professorship in Germany.

A Tale of Two Universities

Germany has been having to deal with plagiarism problems in doctoral dissertations on a large scale the past two years. In particular, with all the discussion about plagiarism, the universities are being informed about many more cases than usual. And if my own email and snail mail is any judge, they tend to be of the sort: X is a nasty idiot, I bet s/he plagiarized.

There are two ways to react to this:

• University of Düsseldorf, Faculty of Arts and Letters:
  This is the school that just recently had to deal with plagiarism in the dissertation of former German Education Minister. One can assume that they have understood the problem, as they published a report on 15 August 2013 on the current situation with two cases of a dissertation revoked. One has taken the university to court, one accepted the result. They don't expect the amount of cases to go down, mostly because of the media attention. But, as the author, Prof. Rohrbacher, states: Wissenschaft in der Verantwortung, it is the responsibility of science to deal with these cases. Objective, unemotional, to the point. As it should be.
• Technical University of Dresden
  As reported in the blog plagiatsgutachten, an anonymous blog has documented problems in a dissertation from this university. There are many fragments documented, but as far as I can see, it mostly documents missing citations and problematic references. One or two might have been negligible, but with 120 documented fragments, one would expect the university to at least take a look when informed of the situation.
  
  Not.
  
  plagiatsgutachten quotes the answer that the blogger received from the Ombud for good scientific practice at the  TU Dresden:
  
  “Solange Sie Ihr Visier nicht heben und es vorziehen, als anonymer Heckenschütze zu fungieren, sind Sie niemand, der in der wissenschaftlichen Welt akzeptiert wird und der sich moralisch über die Beschuldigte stellen kann. Ich brauche Ihren Namen, Ihre Adresse, Ihren Beruf, Ihre Dienststelle und eine Erklärung der Beweggründe, die Sie dazu führten, die Dissertation von Frau D[...] zu untersuchen.
  Vorher werde ich nichts unternehmen.
  
  Prof. Dr. Achim Mehlhorn
  Ombudsmann der TU Dresden”
  
  Let's see if I can preserve the tone of this letter while translating it:
  "As long as you keep your visor down and prefer to act as an anonymous sniper, you are no one who is acceptable in the world of science and who is morally able to stand above the person accused. I need your name, your address, your workplace and an explanation of the reasons that led you to investigate the dissertation of Ms. D[...]. Until I have that information, I will not undertake anything."
  
  It does look like Prof. Mehlhorn got a bit carried away with all the data the NSA is collecting about us. I don't see that it makes a difference if a sanitation engineer documented the problems in a dissertation, or a retired professor of Latin. But one does get the impression that they are a bit touchy in Dresden. They have been working (one hopes) on the VroniPlag Wiki case of Rh, an example of plagiarism in mathematics known for over a year now. I do have the word from the rector of the university, however, that a decision is expected for September. Rh appears to be currently working as a professor in South America, that makes it all the more important that this case be resolved.

A substantiated accusation - one that contains some documentation - should be investigated, in my opinion, regardless of whether the person doing the documentation is known or not. The volume of the other sort of accusation should serve as an alarm signal that something is very, very wrong in the way people use doctorates in Germany.

[thanks to plagiatsgutachten for alerting me to this]

Now with ISSN number!

Just a short note this evening: As can be seen in the little box on the right, the blog "Copy, Shake, and Paste" has been assigned an ISSN number, 2197-4608! I applied for one a long way back and was refused, as they don't give out ISSN numbers to digital-only publications. However, the German National Library has now decided that science blogs do actually qualify for a number, and asked me if I still wanted one.

Yes!

So now it's up there, and I will start offering guest blogging privileges.  Your article needs to report on a case of plagiarism or scientific misconduct somewhere, should be referenced with links to other new reports on the case, and needs to be serious, i.e. no personal attacks like the garbage that pours into my mailbox on a daily basis. Oh, and the article needs to be in English, that's the point of this blog, bringing cases of scientific misconduct out to a wider community.

Berkley vs. Berkeley - Tales of a Diploma Mill

Everyone knows that Berkley is an excellent university in the United States. Or was that Berkeley? Whatever, if someone is sporting a degree that looks impressive, it must be from that place.

Except when it is not.

It has come to light, as the Swiss daily paper Tages-Anzeiger noted on 9 August 2013, that the IT-boss at the University Hospital in Zürich has stepped down because of a missing 'e'. The University of California, Berkeley, is indeed one of the top universities in the US. But it did not grant a doctoral degree to Jürgen Müller. Müller had been working on his doctorate at the University of Passau in Germany when his financing ran out.

Müller then heard about the University of Berkley, and for only $ 3000 in fees he was soon the proud owner of a sheepskin declaring him to be a "Doctor of Science", according to the Tages-Anzeiger.

I am not linking to the site of this degree mill, but it is simple to find with Google. The web page is an eyesore that should light up a million warning lights that this is not a serious institution. Some sins?

• I can't decide if the amateur picture of the smiling, international graduates or the red, blinking button "Honorary degrees" is worst. 
• Soon after the page loads it is clear that the self-starting video of the avatar "Kacy" who wants to sell me a degree is by far the most evil element of the page. Good luck finding the stop button quickly.
• A picture of Albert Einstein on a bicycle next to a quotation is balanced on the other side of the page by a "quotation" stating that one can earn 2 million more dollars in a lifetime with a college degree. 
• The price list is on the first page. Only $ 3505, what a deal!
• There is a button for information about ordering a class ring (!) that leads to a page with generic class rings pictured and a non-working link to a company that will gladly sell you any ring you want.
• The motto appears to be "Earn a World Class, formal University Degree from one of the most recognized and approved institutions in existence... all in possibly as few as 6-8 weeks based upon what you already know!"
• There is no street address or even state given, just a telephone number and a web-based contact form. 
• The domain is registered to one Dr. Dennis J. Globosky in Chicago, Illinois. The Los Angeles Times noted in 2005 that he is a former New Mexico state trouper who only has a high-school degree. The address listed is across the street from the DePaul University Loop Campus, there is no university listed at this address - and from the outside, nothing is visible.  
• Down on the bottom of every page is a yellow band stating "The owners/operators of this site may not conduct business with residents of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, USA". The owner is a resident of Erie, PA, and he had settled out of court in a case brought by the state Attorney General's office, but did not keep up on paying his fines, so the Attorney General has assessed him penalties for contempt of court. But it looks like he is still in business. 

Why would anyone in their right mind think that this is a serious institution of higher learning? 

The Tages-Anzeiger article ends with an interesting note. It seems that in March of 2013 a whistleblower tried to contact Müller's boss about his purchased degree. Müller, as IT boss, apparently had this person on a blacklist, so that emails from him did not bounce, but were just silently destroyed.

I suppose the University Hospital in Zürich is glad that he has resigned. The question is, where will he pop up again where people don't know the difference one letter can make?

Off to a great start

I sit on the committee that evaluates the applications for our Master's program and awards points that determine who will be offered a position. We met today to slog through 57 applications for 20 places. We offer applicants the opportunity to write us a letter, telling us what motivates them to study with us. They don't have to, but there are 6 points or about 15 % of the possible points riding on this, so you can make up weak grades with a great letter.

We had 18 students choose to write letters. As a colleague began reading letter six, he realized that he was reading the same sentences he had just read in letter five! We had not given that one full points as it was rather puffed up and was not well personalized, but here was the same stuff about striving for a position in top management (a strange thing, as our program is not for management but for media computing) and ended with a flowery sentiment about knowing that our Fakultät (strange, we have Fachbereiche) only had a set number of places and how they were sure that they could contribute to the program.

We dug out letter five, each grabbed a laptop and started googling. He won - in about 4.5 seconds he turned up a web page on how to write a motivational letter. And there were all the bits and pieces, slightly reworded here and there.

<rant>
We were pissed.

Here we are sitting in a hot, hot room spending an entire day doing all this work, and they can't be bothered to write a page themselves about why they want to study with us. We contacted the admissions department, we were only allowed to give them 0 points for this part of the application process. I would just as soon reject them with a letter stating why and publish their names somewhere, there is no excuse for behavior like this, especially when the site itself says:

Nicht kopieren!

Lasst euch von den Beispielen in diesem Text inspirieren, aber kopiert sie nicht. Wir haben Rückmeldungen von Hochschulen bekommen, dass bis zu 20% der Bewerber Formulierungen aus diesem Text nutzen. Das lässt euch nicht gut aussehen. Textet also selbst - es ist in eurem eigenen Interesse.

Don't copy!

You can get inspired by this text, but don't copy it. We have heard from schools that up to 20 % of the applicants use sentences from this text. You don't look good that way. Write yourself - it is in your own interest.

Right. This shows that they are not even capable of following directions. Do I want them in our program? No way.

We continued. Guess what motivation letter #12 was like? Yup. A THIRD copy of this self-same letter. S/he was given 0 points as well.

Out of 18 letters, 3 were obvious plagiarisms, or 16,6 %. For a Master's program!! Two plagiarists didn't make the cut, but one had so many other points s/he will be offered a slot. Let me tell you something, dude: I will be speaking about plagiarism at orientation. And I will be watching you.
</rant>

I had heard that the States was having terrible trouble with people handing in plagiarized letters, or Mom and Dad writing them. I am completely at a loss to understand why anyone would do such a stupid thing, especially in a Germany that has been discussing plagiarism for over two years.