Latest revision as of 14:30, 30 April 2021

Resources

Cases

Misconduct Ruling is Silent on Intent

What is this about?

This is a factual case in which a psychologist who is found guilty of scientific misconduct. However, it is unclear whether the mistakes in the investigated publications are deliberately and thus a result of data fabrication or whether they are unintentional. This causes some to question whether the decision to declare the psychologist guilty is the right one, while others agree with the ruling.

Why is this important?

This case demonstrates that it sometimes can be difficult to distinguish scientific misconduct from scientific errors. It shows that the definition of misconduct can be interpreted in different ways and it shows the importance of education of scientist to prevent ‘unintentional scientific misconduct’ and improve research integrity.

For whom is this important?

researchersphd studentsresearch leaders

Other information

When

Where

Virtues & Values

Good Practices & Misconduct

Research Area

Psychology

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 |Resource Type=Cases
 |Title=Misconduct Ruling is Silent on Intent
-|Is About=Mavens of research ethics often insist that there is a clear difference between sloppy science and scientific fraud. But if ever there was a case that blurs that line, it is that of a high-flying evolutionary psychologist who resigned from Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 2011, after the university found him guilty of misconduct<ref>Reich, Eugenie Samuel. "Misconduct ruling is silent on intent." ''Nature'' 489.7415 (2012): 189.</ref>. This is a factual case.
+|Is About=This is a factual case in which a psychologist who is found guilty of scientific misconduct. However, it is unclear whether the mistakes in the investigated publications are deliberately and thus a result of data fabrication or whether they are unintentional. This causes some to question whether the decision to declare the psychologist guilty is the right one, while others agree with the ruling.
 <references />
-|Important Because=The definition of misconduct can be interpreted in different ways.
+|Important Because=This case demonstrates that it sometimes can be difficult to distinguish scientific misconduct from scientific errors. It shows that the definition of misconduct can be interpreted in different ways and it shows the importance of education of scientist to prevent ‘unintentional scientific misconduct’ and improve research integrity.
 |Important For=researchers; phd students; research leaders
 }}

Difference between revisions of "Resource:Af266b39-20a3-4b97-a876-08eebb428fe6"