A University of Oregon graduate student falsified numbers in experiments from a UO brain research lab — and his then-supervising scientist now faces the embarrassment of retracting four papers from notable scientific journals.
Student David Anderson worked for then-UO neuroscientist Edward Awh. Riding a wave of research success, Awh was hired away last year by the University of Chicago.
At times in the past half-dozen years, Anderson “knowingly falsified data by removing outlier values or replacing outliers with mean values to produce results that conform to predictions,” according to an announcement Friday from the Office of Research Integrity in the U.S. Department of Health Human Services.
No information has been released publicly about why Anderson falsified the data.
He is no longer in the UO student directory and could not be reached for comment.
Awh declined to say anything about Anderson — as did UO officials.
At the UO, Awh conducted behavioral and biological studies of selective attention and working memory.
His team primarily used electroencephalogram data to link thinking and remembering with activity in the brain.
Anderson went to work in Awh’s lab in fall 2009. He earned a master’s of science degree in psychology in fall 2010.
He is not attending the UO this summer, UO spokesman Lewis Taylor said.
Anderson told Retraction Watch — a MacArthur Foundation-funded blog — that he made an error of judgement.
He apologized for “undermining the integrity of the scientific method and eroding the trust upon which it is built,” he said.
Anderson’s actions were an “isolated incident,” Taylor said.
In an e-mailed statement, Awh said he reported the fabrication to UO authorities within hours of learning about them.
The UO has strict protocols for notifying officials, Taylor said.
“It was done by the book,” he said.
UO interim vice president for research and innovation Brad Shelton issued a statement saying: “Our faculty and administrators are resolved in their goal of maintaining our high standards of research integrity through vigorous review and continued enhancements to our policies, procedures and training.”
The $5.47 million in federal research grants that funded the flawed studies was provided by the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Institutes of Health.
The studies appeared from 2011 through 2013 in The Journal of Neuroscience; the Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance; Attention, Perception and Psychophysics and Psychological Science. Awh is an associate editor of the last-named journal.
Awh said Friday that he’ll ask each journal to retract the studies.
He had to do the same earlier this year for a study that had landed on the cover of the May 2014 Journal of Neuroscience. The study showed the researcher’s groundbreaking rendering of subjects’ brain storing memories in real time.
Anderson was listed as a co-author, but Awh said the problem with that particular work was a flaw in coding protocols used in the data analysis.
Last year, when Awh and research partner Ed Vogel got an offer from the University of Chicago, the UO fought to keep the scientists here but to no avail.
Awh took a parting shot at the UO in a comment that appeared in The Chicago Maroon student newspaper.
“UO is a public university with relatively little support from the state so that does put constraints on the ability to support research in the university,” he was quoted as saying. “We’re excited to go to a place where we can really push forward a broad program of neuroscience with the support of a university that has a lot of resources to make things possible.”
The University of Chicago issued a statement about the fabrication, in support of Awh.
Chicago psychology department chairwoman Susan Levine said: “Ed is not only a leading researcher in cognitive neuroscience, but also a champion of scientific integrity. We are excited to have him join us at the University of Chicago,” she said.
Anderson resolved the matter with the federal oversight agency by signing an agreement saying that, if he works in the field again, he must do so under strict supervision — and an approved plan — meant to insure the scientific integrity of the results, according to the agency.
Follow Diane on Twitter @diane_dietz . Email diane.dietz@registerguard.com .