Star professor in research fraud case sues Harvard and accusers

A leading behavioural scientist accused of using fraudulent research data is suing Harvard University and scholars behind an academic integrity website for $25 million (£20 million) on the grounds of defamation and gender discrimination.

Francesca Gino, a high-profile expert on dishonesty and workplace behaviour, said she had launched the legal action because allegations made by the Data Colada site had “sullied, if not destroyed”, her career and amounted to a “vicious defamatory smear campaign”, while her employer had botched its investigation and treated her more harshly than male colleagues accused of similar misconduct.

In a 100-page lawsuit lodged in a federal court in Massachusetts on 2 August, Professor Gino accuses Harvard of failing in its investigation to produce substantial evidence for deliberate data fraud, adding that its sanctions – including a two-year suspension without pay that bars her from campus and undertaking teaching duties – are “unwarranted and excessive”.

“Harvard’s complete and utter disregard for evidence, due process and confidentiality should frighten all academic researchers,” said Andrew Miltenberg, Professor Gino’s attorney.

“The university’s lack of integrity in its review process stripped Professor Gino of her rights, career and reputation – and failed miserably with respect to gender equity. The bias and uneven application of oversight in this case is appalling.”

The lawsuit comes after news broke in June that Professor Gino, who was paid more than $1 million in salary, had been placed on administrative leave after an internal investigation. Later that month, the Data Colada website ran a series of blogs on what it called “evidence of fraud” in four of her studies, of which two have been retracted with a third retraction pending.

In her court filing, Professor Gino insists that neither Harvard nor Data Colada has evidence that she personally committed data manipulation, noting a YouTube interview with Data Colada author Uri Simonsohn, who is named alongside professors Leif Nelson and Joseph Simmons as defendants, in which he states that he had no evidence that she committed data manipulation.

“My belief is that she did it. But there is no evidence. But it doesn’t really matter. Because maybe somebody else did it in her computer, you as a co-author are equally victimised by that,” he said in the interview, according to the filing.

In a statement on LinkedIn, Professor Gino said she had “never, ever falsified data or engaged in research misconduct of any kind”.

“Today I had no choice but to file a lawsuit against Harvard University and members of the Data Colada group, who worked together to destroy my career and reputation despite admitting they have no evidence proving their allegations,” she said.

“While claiming to stand for process excellence, they reached outrageous conclusions based entirely on inference, assumption, and implausible leaps of logic. They created and perpetuated a false narrative about my ethics and integrity, which has had a devastating impact on my friends, colleagues, collaborators and, most of all, my family.”

On the claims against Harvard, the filing states that the university’s investigation failed to find a single co-author or research assistant who could state that they had evidence that Professor Gino had manipulated research data. Neither did Harvard’s investigation examine raw datasets and research records, it adds.

It also claims that male colleagues were investigated under a different policy and that the university failed to protect her confidentiality – some of the many examples where male professors have been treated differently by the university.

Harvard Business School’s dean, Srikant Datar, another defendant named in the action, is also accused of communicating with the Data Colada blog during the investigation, and disclosing its findings when the probe was complete. 

Professor Gino’s legal team provided a statement from Frances Frei, professor of technology and operations at Harvard Business School, who called her colleague’s treatment “disturbing and frankly terrifying”.

“The more I learn about the process used in these investigations, the more troubled I am. Professor Gino’s career and life have been shattered without any proof she did anything wrong,” she said.

Harvard declined to comment.

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com