Science It’s bezzle time: The Dean of Engineering at the University of Nevada gets paid $372,127 a year and wrote a paper that’s so bad, you can’t believe it - of these age factors when considering these otpions supply chain procedure for maintaining will be beneficial

Article (Archive)
“As we look to sleep and neuroscience for answers we can study flies specifically the Drosophila melanogaster we highlight in our research.”

1. The story
Someone writes:

I recently read a paper of yours in the Chronicle about how academic fraudsters get away with it. I came across a strange case that I thought you would at least have some interest in when a faculty members owns an open access journal that costs to publish and then publishes a large number of papers in the journal. The most recent issue is all from the same authors (family affair).

It is from an administrator at University of Nevada Reno. This concern is related to publications within a journal that may not be reputable. The Dean of Engineering has a number of publications in the International Supply Chain Technology Journal that are in question Google Scholar. Normally, I would contact the editor, or publisher, but in this case, there are complexities.

This may not be an issue but many of the articles are short, being 1 or 2 pages. In addition, some have a peer review process of 3 days or less. Another concern is that many of the papers do not even discuss what is in the title. Take the following paper: It presents nothing about the title. Many of the papers read as if AI was used.

While the quality of these papers may not be of concern, the representation of these as publications could be. The person publishing them should have ethical standards that exceed those that are under his leadership. He is also the highest ranking official of the college of engineering and is expected to lead by example and be a good model to those under him.

If that is not enough, looking into the journal in more detail alludes to more ethical questions. The journal is published by PWD Group out of Texas. Lookup of PWD Group out of Texas yields that Erick Jones is the Director and President. Erick Jones was also the Editor of the journal. In addition to the journal articles, even books authored by Erick Jones are published by PWD.

Further looking into the journal publications you will see that there are a large number with Erick Jones Sr. and Erick Jones Jr. There are also a large number with Felicia Jefferson. Felicia is also a faculty member at UNR and the spouse of Dean Jones. A few of the papers raise concerns related to deer supply chains. The following has a very fast peer review process of a few days and the caption of a white tailed deer is a reindeer. Another paper is even shorter, with a very fast peer review, and captions yet a different deer which is still not a white tail. It is unlikely these papers went through a robust peer review.

While these papers affiliation are prior to coming to UNR, the incoherence, conflict of interest, and incorrect data do lot look good for UNR and they were published either when Dr. Jefferson was applying to UNR or early upon her arrival. Similar issues with the timing of this article. Also, in the print version of the journal, Dr. Jefferson handles submissions (pp3).

Maybe this information is nothing to be concerned about. At the very least, it sheds a poor light on the scientific process, especially when a Dean is the potential abuser. It is not clear how he can encourage high quality manuscripts from other faculty when he has been able to climb the ladder using his own publishing house. I’ll leave you with a paper with a relevant title on minimizing train accidents through minimizing sleep deprivation. It seems like a really important study. The short read should convince you otherwise and make you question the understanding of the scientific process by these authors.

Of specific concern is whether these publications led to he, or his spouse, being hired at UNR. If these are considered legitimate papers, the entire hiring and tenure process at UNR is compromised. Similar arguments exist if these papers are used in the annual evaluation process. It also raises a conflict of interest if he pays to publish and then receives proceeds on the back end.

I have no comment on the hiring, tenure, and evaluation process at UNR, or on any conflicts of interest. I know nothing about what is going on at UNR. It’s a horrifying story, though.

2. The published paper
OK, here it is, in its entirety (except for references). You absolutely have to see it to believe it:

Compared to this, the Why We Sleep guy is a goddamn titan of science.

3. The Dean of Engineering
From the webpage of the Dean of Engineering at the University of Reno:

Dr. Erick C. Jones is a former senior science advisor in the Office of the Chief Economist at the U.S. State Department. He is a former professor and Associate Dean for Graduate Studies at the College of Engineering at The University of Texas at Arlington.

From the press release announcing his appointment, dated July 01, 2022:

Jones is an internationally recognized researcher in industrial manufacturing and systems engineering. . . . “In Erick Jones, our University has a dynamic leader who understands how to seize moments of opportunity in order to further an agenda of excellence,” University President Brian Sandoval said. . . . Jones was on a three-year rotating detail at National Science Foundation where he was a Program Director in the Engineering Directorate for Engineering Research Centers Program. . . .
Jones is internationally recognized for his pioneering work with Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technologies, Lean Six Sigma Quality Management (the understanding of whether a process is well controlled), and autonomous inventory control. He has published more than 243 manuscripts . . .

According to this source, his salary in 2022 was $372,127.

According to wikipedia, UNR is the state’s flagship public university.

I was curious to see what else Jones had published so I searched him on Google scholar and took a look at his three most-cited publications. The second of these appeared to be a textbook, and the third was basically 8 straight pages of empty jargon—ironic that a journal called Total Quality Management would publish something that has no positive qualities! The most-cited paper on the list was pretty bad too, an empty bit of make-work, the scientific equivalent of the reports that white-collar workers need to fill out and give to their bosses who can then pass these along to their bosses to demonstrate how productive they are. In short, this guy seems to be a well-connected time server in the Ed Wegman mode, minus the plagiarism.

He was a Program Director at the National Science Foundation! Your tax dollars at work.

Can you imagine what it would feel like to be a student in the engineering school at the flagship university of the state of Nevada, and it turns out the school is being run by the author of this:

Our recent study has the premise that both humans and flies sleep during the night and are awake during the day, and both species require a significant amount of sleep each day when their neural systems are developing in specific activities. This trait is shared by both species. An investigation was segmented into three subfields, which were titled “Life span,” “Time-to-death,” and “Chronological age.” In D. melanogaster, there was a positive correlation between life span, the intensity of young male medflies, and the persistence of movement. Time-to-death analysis revealed that the male flies passed away two weeks after exhibiting the supine behavior. Chronological age, activity in D. melanogaster was adversely correlated with age; however, there was no correlation between chronological age and time-to-death. It is probable that the incorporation the findings of age-related health factors and increased sleep may lead toless train accidents. of these age factors when considering these options supply chain procedure for maintaining will be beneficial.

I can’t even.

P.S. The thing I still can’t figure out is, why did Jones publish this paper at all? He’d already landed the juicy Dean of Engineering job, months before submitting it to his own journal. To then put his name on something so ludicrously bad . . . it can’t help his career at all, could only hurt. And obviously it’s not going to do anything to reduce train accidents. What was he possibly thinking?

P.P.S. I guess this happens all the time; it’s what Galbraith called the “bezzle.” We’re just more likely to hear about when it happens at some big-name place like Stanford, Harvard, Ohio State, or Cornell. It still makes me mad, though. I’m sure there are lots of engineers who are doing good work and could be wonderful teachers, and instead UNR spends $372,127 on this guy.

I’ll leave the last word to another UNR employee, from the above-linked press release:

“What is exciting about having Jones as our new dean for the College of Engineering is how he clearly understands the current landscape for what it means to be a Carnegie R1 ‘Very High Research’ institution,” Provost Jeff Thompson said. “He very clearly understands how we can amplify every aspect of our College of Engineering, so that we can continue to build transcendent programs for engineering education and research.”

They’re transcending something, that’s for sure.

My challenge for Jeff Thompson: Show up at an engineering class at your institution, read aloud the entire contents (i.e., the two paragraphs) of “Using Science to Minimize Sleep Deprivation that may reduce Train Accidents,” then engage the students in a discussion of what this says about “the current landscape for what it means to be a Carnegie R1 ‘Very High Research’ institution.”

Should be fun, no? Just remember, the best way to keep the students’ attention is to remind them that, yes, this will be covered on the final exam.

Spoiler: Prof. Erick C. Jones

 

[oldTireWater]

I'll cut him some slack based on two mitigating facts:

1) Most engineers hate writing.
2) He IS a nigger.

 

[Diana Moon Glampers]

To me that profile looks like a spook and like these are government invented credentials.

US State department history, working at a school that is incredibly close to top-secret government installations. Spook. They install these in positions of authority in order to check and make sure no professors are hinting at things that suggest they are talking about secret installations and projects.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

To me that profile looks like a spook and like these are government invented credentials.

US State department history, working at a school that is incredibly close to top-secret government installations. Spook. They install these in positions of authority in order to check and make sure no professors are hinting at things that suggest they are talking about secret installations and projects.

He must have been one hell of an undercover operative, then.

 

[CoolFool]

The blog has interesting comments finding even more ridiculous research papers.

But more interestingly, Dr. Erik Jones himself actually replied in the comments responding to the accusations about an hour ago:

Erick Jones Sr, MSIE, PHD on February 7, 2024 6:54 PM at 6:54 pm said:

Dear Andrew, – this is the grammar corrected version

Hello, my name is Erick Jones. Ordinarily, I refrain from responding to critiques of this nature, but I do value genuine criticism. I stepped down as the editor of the journal a few years ago, though I was its founder and initial editor. Despite the journal not being profitable, I continue to support it financially as an investor in the owning company. The journal is peer-reviewed and was originally created to cater to American supply chain practitioners, researchers, and undergraduate students engaged in applied application labs. It aimed to facilitate publishing for faculty and students involved in internships and class projects on applied engineering activities relevant to supply chain technologies. My belief was that publishing in top-tier journals was excessively time-consuming, and many professionals in the field struggled to timely publish applied research.

I typically do not include this endeavor in my resume. I founded the journal after securing tenure twice and achieving full professorship, ensuring it was not perceived as a strategy for tenure. It’s important to note that I have authored several textbooks and numerous articles in other journals that are more highly regarded and, frankly, more recognized in the field. When I began, my intention was not to become an administrator but rather a faculty member dedicated to making a difference, enhancing access to applied ideas, projects, and research in supply chain engineering technology.

Regarding your critique of the numerous contributors, the editorial board, and the journal’s current operations, I believe your assessment is unjust. Specifically, concerning the topic you emphasized, which was developed by U.S. students, it presents a new idea supported by what is considered novel findings. It acknowledges the need for further investigation and serves primarily as a foundational study. Its brevity aims to bridge the gap between science and practical application, offering a concise note on this connection.

I disagree with your harsh critique and analysis of this work. However, as a faculty member and academic, I recognize the importance of such evaluations. I have forwarded your comments to the current editor, enabling them to formally convey your critique to the corresponding author. This process allows all authors the opportunity to respond. The fate of the article will then be determined by the reviewers, following the standard procedure for any paper publication.

I am disheartened to see a blog being used in a manner that potentially undermines the integrity of the journal publishing process, especially in the current climate where accusations of plagiarism among administrators are prevalent. However, I acknowledge your right to critique the content.
Regarding my expectations for faculty publications, I firmly believe that tenured faculty funded by state and federal grants should make their research publicly accessible. Publications serve as a vital conduit for transferring new knowledge back to students in U.S. classrooms and connecting them with research conducted in our state-supported laboratories. I am of the opinion that a variety of publication levels are necessary to achieve this goal effectively, ensuring that our students, the industry, and the broader public can comprehend and utilize the findings. I take great pride in our faculty’s efforts to disseminate their research across all levels. While I acknowledge that our institution may not be as widely recognized as some, like Columbia, I genuinely believe we have among the best faculty in the country.

I remain steadfast in this commitment.

Should you choose to criticize me for encouraging our faculty to engage in research that extends beyond the confines of academia—research that leads to tangible outputs like patents, lab-to-market initiatives, and the ability to inspire society by making our work accessible and understandable to the general public—I accept such criticism as part of my chosen path.

I maintain that publishing accessible discussions on the impact of large-scale, tax-driven investments in innovation is essential.
Your concerns about our journal are noted, but if you are representing Columbia and prefer not to publish for the public good, that is your prerogative.
Indeed, not all my work appears in journals like Science, but my emphasis is on ensuring accessibility. Without such access, one might incur a fee to access my papers, potentially to criticize them. Typically, feedback is directed to editors as part of the critique process.

I am a proponent of public access to innovative ideas. It’s regrettable if the intent of this discourse is being diverted. I did welcome the governor’s decision to award state employees in Nevada a raise, which, given our public institution status, includes the publication of our salaries.
The salaries of Deans at Columbia are not something I’m familiar with.

My publications cover a broad range of supply chain-related topics, and I believe it’s vital to contribute to journals of all levels. I cannot expect faculty to publish if I do not lead by example. I hope you’ll consider looking at some of my other works in various journals and book chapters currently under review.

Best wishes,

Erick Jones.

Sounds like BS to me, especially the bit about how he's proud of the journal because it shows new novel ideas lmao, but what do I know about engineering?

 

[Absolutego]

I'll cut him some slack based on two mitigating facts:

1) Most engineers hate writing.
2) He IS a nigger.

What I find funny is that, for a guy whose supposed discipline is engineering-related, he didn't even give an engineering solution to the problem he was investigating. He just wrote 2 paragraphs of extremely thick jargon about sleep being important.
The credential laundering academic journals do to keep utterly useless people employed is another reason why we should take away their student loan money.

 

[Boggy B]

I took one look at that paper and it was immediately apparent that he is a diversity hire. Only the cadre of nigger-loving niggers known as higher education could endorse such nonsense. I am vindicated by opening the last spoiler right at the end.

They put a gorilla in a suit, gave him a pen and ran before they could see what he would produce. They returned to see him with his finger in his flared nostril atop a mountain of feces. By this, they are able to declare, "Behold, we are amongst a legend in earthworks! Grant him a Ph.D. in Engineering for he produceth so much more than any gollywog outside a suit might!"

Dr. Erik Jones himself actually replied in the comments

I don't know why someone accused of using a machine to write his dissertations would go on to create a page of machine-written blathering that boils down to "umm actually we put lots of work into our papers, sweaty!"; It feels a bit disingenuous.

 

[The Internet Dick]

I screencapped a detail from the 'Using Science' paper (shown below) since the text excerpt didn't quite capture the awe-inspiring elegance of its logic. Behold:



Putting aside the innumerable typos and grammatical and syntactical errors in just that few inches of text, the only data offered to show similarity in biological sleep patterns between these flies and human beings is that both humans and D. Melanogaster flies are typically active during the day and sleep at night. That's it, the only similarity listed. And then he categorizes life span, time-to-death (?), and persistence of movement, for reasons. And the lifecycle of the flies shows what, exactly? That flies sleep, buzz around, grow old, and die? Therefore, we should incorporate this important finding into supply chain procedures, thus causing less train accidents?

This reads like a last-minute crunch in high school the night before a paper is due. The flies are sciency window-dressing, thrown in to give the illusion of an empirical, experimental approach. Look, guys, we studied the flies: Data! But it isn't meaningful data. It's bullshit data. There's no evidence of correlative similarity in sleep patterns. There's no evidence of anything. No meaningful conclusion could possibly be drawn from this pseudo-study.

Nobody would be fooled by this.

 

[William Murderface]

It sounds like professors that add publications to their CV that upon closer inspection are discovered to be vanity press or non-peer reviewed journals from diploma mill or non-accredited schools.

The Intelligent Design crowd loves to say they've got over 100 peer-reviewed books and papers published but all but one of them are the result of vanity presses or non-peer reviewed journals from diploma mills or non-accredited (normally religious) schools. The one paper that is published in a real journal is in a minor and obscure mathematics journal and it just says evolution can't possibly be real because the math doesn't make sense and here's a bunch of math to prove it. Meanwhile, the last two centuries of biology keeps on keeping on with entire libraries of evidence supporting evolution and adding more every day.

 

[Mr. Zed da Robot Poon Fed]

I'll cut him some slack based on two mitigating facts:

1) Most engineers hate writing.
2) He IS a nigger.

As a fellow engineer, I hate writing unless I’m in full autist mode or something. My focus is with numbers.

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

Imagine if that salary funded 5 Kiwi lawsuits instead of a nigger.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

Sounds like BS to me, especially the bit about how he's proud of the journal because it shows new novel ideas lmao, but what do I know about engineering?

It sounds like he had ChatGPT to do the writin of the words for him this time.

I think some may be missing the point here.. this guy not only is ludicrously overpaid, but this isn't just resume padding. He churns out shit like this in the journal he founded and owns and has his employer pay the journal fees to the journal he owns to 'review' it (I seriously doubt that there is any review, or if it is, that it's conducted by anyone who isn't listed as an author on the same papers). I mean it's only $200 a pop which seems like chump change compared to his salary but he gets paid to sit around in his office all day anyway, why not bang in some random text into Word, add a random picture of an animal, and click 'Post'? If that's too much hard work, maybe he has his illiterate ten year old son do it.

 

[Safir]

why not bang in some random text into Word, add a random picture of an animal, and click 'Post'? If that's too much hard work, maybe he has his illiterate ten year old son do it.

You're laughing but I'm an actual engineer and for me it's really too much hard work. I'm incapable of generating random bullshit, be it this, or video game j*urnos writing about gay Mario.

I don't mean it's degrading (although that, too), I just fucking can't, I was dropped as a kid and broke my imagination. I'd rather wash adult baby troon taints for a living than do academic writing or journalism, because at least during physical work my brain is free. A foray into pay-per-article gaming journalism would end like this for me:
day 1, stay up late, write 5 articles, very excited I'm gonna be rich
day 2, write 2 articles
day 3, write nothing, promise to catch up tomorrow for sure
day 5, finish day 3's article
day 8, still thinking what to write
day 10, bills due
day 15, neck myself

 

[CoolFool]

It sounds like he had ChatGPT to do the writin of the words for him this time.

I think some may be missing the point here.. this guy not only is ludicrously overpaid, but this isn't just resume padding. He churns out shit like this in the journal he founded and owns and has his employer pay the journal fees to the journal he owns to 'review' it (I seriously doubt that there is any review, or if it is, that it's conducted by anyone who isn't listed as an author on the same papers). I mean it's only $200 a pop which seems like chump change compared to his salary but he gets paid to sit around in his office all day anyway, why not bang in some random text into Word, add a random picture of an animal, and click 'Post'? If that's too much hard work, maybe he has his illiterate ten year old son do it.

Yeah this is honestly really bad and I'm surprised to see there is no news outlet talking about this yet since this was discovered days ago.

 

[DamnWolves!]

The flies are sciency window-dressing, thrown in to give the illusion of an empirical, experimental approach. Look, guys, we studied the flies: Data!

Here's the thing: where are the data? I don't see any kind of table or graph.

Unless this is somehow a review article, there is nothing discovered here, which is the bare minimum for publication. Moreover, there is not a single, proper citation in the text of this article -- not even to the NYT article referenced in the introduction.

I suspect this may be an attempt to embezzle grant money. I'd say the university should look into this, but we both know they'd rather let it continue than suffer the embarrassment of an investigation...

 

[Tony Vivaldi]

"Our recent study has the premise that both humans and flies sleep during the night and are awake during the day, "

Really. Empirical studies indicate that some humans are crepuscular, coming out at twilight to feed and drink at their local watering holes and in order to mate with whatever hambeast is suitable enough after several varied alcoholic beverages, and then sleep with their mouth open, which often draws flies, while other humans are nocturnal--they sleep during the day as they are a night manager at a bowling alley from 8 p.m. to 6 in the morning.

 

[Kulee Baba]

I suspect this may be an attempt to embezzle grant money. I'd say the university should look into this, but we both know they'd rather let it continue than suffer the embarrassment of an investigation...

It could be that, but I think just as likely it’s a charlatan inputting trash just for the sake of having an article published. The goal in question is to just make his resume come off all the more lofty. Reading it reminded me of the Nathan For You segment where Fielder hires a ghostwriter for a fake newspaper who coincidentally is black. Skip to the 4 minute mark.

I mean there’s nothing extraordinary here. If I trained myself to shut up and type I could also just shit out words. I mean not too different from forums. The bigger disgrace is just the fact that no one takes “academic articles” remotely seriously unless it’s for one of the major journals. Even then it’s not even a conspiracy theory to recognize academic papers but most of all studies are victim to deceit for the aid of corporations, politicians, or just a over educated shithead wanting to be on 60 Minutes. Shoutout to Dan Ariely!

Anyway this is just another example of why I believe the utterly evil dumbing down of academic studies is part of America’s decline. Higher education was never meant to be something for every damn average student but Lyndon B Johnson had to fuck everything up. Truly the worst President ever.

 

[glass_houses]

I suspect this may be an attempt to embezzle grant money. I'd say the university should look into this, but we both know they'd rather let it continue than suffer the embarrassment of an investigation...

Or, as Dean, he's expected to publish a certain number papers during his tenure and is paying for a vanity journal so that the random drivel he writes doesn't draw the attention of qualified professionals.

He could be on the government payroll as @Diana Moon Glampers says, but the self published journal and Chat GP 'papers' are so obviously bullshit that anyone with two braincells to rub together can see it.

I'm backing "malignant narcissist rises to the top with stellar references from organisations desperate to get rid of him".

 

[Party Hat Wurmple]

Or, as Dean, he's expected to publish a certain number papers during his tenure and is paying for a vanity journal so that the random drivel he writes doesn't draw the attention of qualified professionals.

He could be on the government payroll as @Diana Moon Glampers says, but the self published journal and Chat GP 'papers' are so obviously bullshit that anyone with two braincells to rub together can see it.

I'm backing "malignant narcissist rises to the top with stellar references from organisations desperate to get rid of him".

This. I'll actually defend the guy. DEI, and skin color pick aside, academia is RIPE with this type of garbage. If you think Le Scientists and Engineers Deans and department heads are smart of genius, most are borderline fucking retarded. Universities force them to keep up a certain number of papers and pages and most of them are mindless drivel like this to fill the base requirements. When you're stuck making at least a few hundred page papers a year on "studies", you tend to eventually say "Fuck it, nobody reads these" and let piss fly into the wind. Academia is a breeding ground for incompetence. It always has been. It rewards the lazy.

TLDR; Ain't the guys fault. Academia basically demands you do this. Colleges suck. Stop going to them and giving them money.

 

[Tony Vivaldi]

This. I'll actually defend the guy. DEI, and skin color pick aside, academia is RIPE with this type of garbage. If you think Le Scientists and Engineers Deans and department heads are smart of genius, most are borderline fucking retarded. Universities force them to keep up a certain number of papers and pages and most of them are mindless drivel like this to fill the base requirements. When you're stuck making at least a few hundred page papers a year on "studies", you tend to eventually say "Fuck it, nobody reads these" and let piss fly into the wind. Academia is a breeding ground for incompetence. It always has been. It rewards the lazy.

TLDR; Ain't the guys fault. Academia basically demands you do this. Colleges suck. Stop going to them and giving them money.

In know a guy who is goofy and stupid...and has two masters degrees from a reputable college, and now he wants to go for his doctorate.

Doesn't know shit about his chosen subject, I had to school him on all the finer points and details he missed in a five minute conversation. I was AWESTRUCK at how ignorant he was. I must say, I lost all respect for 'higher learning', when I was at University, although I'd already lost faith in it, this actually clinched it.
I challenged him on why he was hell-bent on giving money to his ideological enemies. No answer.

I shouldn't be amazed, as these institutions are clearly degree-mills. Pay enough, get the degree. It's that simple. It's not about what you know or what you think you know, or how to go about learning it and remembering it and applying it.