Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
S May 26, 2022 at 18:17 history mod moved comments to chat
S May 26, 2022 at 18:17 comment added cag51 Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
May 25, 2022 at 4:16 vote accept CommunityBot
May 24, 2022 at 17:48 history edited Ray CC BY-SA 4.0
added 107 characters in body
May 24, 2022 at 17:41 history edited Ray CC BY-SA 4.0
added 107 characters in body
May 24, 2022 at 17:32 comment added Ray @VoodooCode It might backfire. It still needs to be done if we want to avoid having fabricated results in the literature. The emails to editors can be done anonymously, if the OP chooses. It probably isn't practical to inform the chair anonymously, but the only way the chair can hear about this and not be enraged that people in their department would suggest such a thing is if the chair is just as unprincipled as the supervisors. And on the off chance that the department is that rotten, the OP's PhD is probably worthless no matter what they do.
May 24, 2022 at 17:24 comment added VoodooCode -1: While I fully agree that fabricating data and selling it as genuine is the worst possible approach, the second part of this answer may seriously backfire. Chances are good that the advisor has a better connection to the department chair than the OP. Also, sending seemingly random emails to journals that their articles are fake is something the department chair certainly won't like either and will escalate. Especially when done either before or in parallel to talking to them. The other side of the story will sound like: The OP cannot finish their PhD in time, now they are panicking.
May 24, 2022 at 17:21 history edited Ray CC BY-SA 4.0
added 158 characters in body
May 24, 2022 at 17:12 history answered Ray CC BY-SA 4.0