Bad Chemistry
Tom Jones and Dan Michaels are both fourth-year Ph.D.
students in the chemistry department at a major U.S. research
university. They joined Charles Imhof's research group at the
same time, and they will both graduate at approximately the
same time next year. Over the years, the two students have come
to view each other as rivals and competitors for Professor
Imhof's favor. Michaels is a fairly quiet, reserved individual
who hopes to teach some day at a small liberal arts college,
while Jones has an aggressive, sometimes abrasive
personality, holds Imhof as his ultimate role model, and hopes
to be a professor in a top-ten rated academic chemistry
research department. By their fourth year, their dislike for
each other has become obvious to all of the other students in
the group.
At a weekly meeting during which students in Imhof's
synthetic chemistry subgroup summarize their research
activities over the past week and their plans for he next
week's experiments, Michaels describes an extension to his
work. The new project is a fairly major departure from what he
has been doing, but he says that he hopes to get to it soon.
None of the meeting participants make any comments except
Imhof, who casually remarks, "That would be really interesting
if it worked."
Two months later, Michaels has made no further mention of
his new idea as he has become bogged down in writing a paper
and preparing for a chemical education conference. An incoming
student, Dave Perry, arrives at the university and is assigned
to Imhof's lab for summer research. Perry shares Jones'
attitude and views on what it means to be a "real scientist,"
and the two hit it off almost immediately. Hoping that Perry
will join the group on a permanent basis when new students
choose their advisers in the fall of their first year, and
reasoning that some quick results will not only encourage him
to do so but also help to win Imhof's favor, Jones tells
Perry of Michaels' idea. He advises Perry, "Go ahead and try
it. He'll never get to it anyway -- he cares more about
teaching than real work."
Michaels' idea proves to be a very good one. With some
technical help from Jones, Perry succeeds in synthesizing
and determining the structure of an unprecedented chemical
compound. When he presents his data at the weekly group
meeting, Imhof is visibly impressed and states, "Write that up
with Tom ASAP."
Michaels correctly surmises that Jones has passed along
his research idea to Perry behind his back. After the meeting,
he goes to Imhof's office and complains that the idea for the
experiment Perry has just reported was his. Michaels says that
he thinks he should be given credit for the research. Further,
he demands that disciplinary action be taken against Jones.
He says, "Tom gave Dave Perry my idea! He is obviously
trying to undermine my work here! Can't you see that?" Imhof
retorts, "Tom and Dave understand what we're trying to
accomplish here, and I appreciate their fervor for research!
What do you care? Your priorities obviously lie in other areas.
Next time, don't waste so much time on chemical education
activities and maybe you won't get scooped!"
Discussion Questions
- How should Imhof respond to Dan Michaels' request for
"disciplinary action"? What form(s) might such action
take?
- Who should be the co-authors on the paper? In what order
should they be listed, assuming that it is most beneficial to
have one's name listed first?
- How do attitudes toward career goals affect this
case?
- What could Imhof have done differently over the past four
years (including recently) to make the present situation less
troublesome?
Back to Top
-
Commentary: Bad Chemistry
Vivian Weil's commentary on how the vagueness and uncertainty of conventions on credit and ownership create subtle but complex problems in the practice of science, also illustrating the subtleties of the authority relationship between student and professor.
-
Participant Commentary: Bad Chemistry
Participant's commentary on how the vagueness and uncertainty of conventions on credit and ownership create subtle but complex problems in the practice of science, also illustrating the subtleties of the authority relationship between student and professor.