Difference between revisions of "Resource:716dca50-ee7d-4fc5-86f2-491d88d3cf4d"
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
|Title=Mad Scientist: The Unique Case of a Published Delusion | |Title=Mad Scientist: The Unique Case of a Published Delusion | ||
| − | |Is About=In 1951, entomologist | + | |Is About=In 1951, an entomologist published in the ''Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington'' her personal experiences with a mite infestation of her scalp that resisted all treatment and was undetectable to anyone other than herself. She is recognized as having suffered from Delusory Parasitosis: her paper shows her to be a textbook case of the condition. The paper is unique in the scientific literature in that its conclusions may be based on data that was unconsciously fabricated by the author’s mind. The paper may merit retraction on the grounds of error or even scientific misconduct 'by reason of insanity', but such a retraction raises the issue of discrimination against the mentally ill. This article asks what responsibilities journals have when faced with delusions disguised as science, what right editors have to question the sanity of an author, and what should be done about the paper itself<ref>Shelomi, Matan. "Mad scientist: The unique case of a published delusion." ''Science and Engineering Ethics'' 19.2 (2013): 381-388.</ref>. This is a factual case. |
| − | + | <references /> | |
| − | + | |Important Because=By placing higher emphasis on article content than author identity, scientific integrity is maintained and a balance is struck between avoiding discrimination against the mentally ill and not preventing patients from seeking needed treatment<ref>Shelomi, Matan. "Mad scientist: The unique case of a published delusion." ''Science and Engineering Ethics'' 19.2 (2013): 381-388.</ref>. | |
| − | This is a factual case. | + | <references /> |
| − | |Important Because=By placing higher emphasis on article content than author identity, scientific integrity is maintained and a balance is struck between avoiding discrimination against the mentally ill and not preventing patients from seeking needed treatment<ref> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 15: | Line 11: | ||
|Has Link=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11948-011-9339-2 | |Has Link=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11948-011-9339-2 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{Related To}} | + | {{Related To |
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0 | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
|Involves=Traver paper | |Involves=Traver paper | ||
Revision as of 18:54, 26 May 2020
ResourcesMad Scientist: The Unique Case of a Published Delusion
What is this about?
In 1951, an entomologist published in the Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington her personal experiences with a mite infestation of her scalp that resisted all treatment and was undetectable to anyone other than herself. She is recognized as having suffered from Delusory Parasitosis: her paper shows her to be a textbook case of the condition. The paper is unique in the scientific literature in that its conclusions may be based on data that was unconsciously fabricated by the author’s mind. The paper may merit retraction on the grounds of error or even scientific misconduct 'by reason of insanity', but such a retraction raises the issue of discrimination against the mentally ill. This article asks what responsibilities journals have when faced with delusions disguised as science, what right editors have to question the sanity of an author, and what should be done about the paper itself[1]. This is a factual case.
- ↑ Shelomi, Matan. "Mad scientist: The unique case of a published delusion." Science and Engineering Ethics 19.2 (2013): 381-388.
Why is this important?
By placing higher emphasis on article content than author identity, scientific integrity is maintained and a balance is struck between avoiding discrimination against the mentally ill and not preventing patients from seeking needed treatment[1].
- ↑ Shelomi, Matan. "Mad scientist: The unique case of a published delusion." Science and Engineering Ethics 19.2 (2013): 381-388.
