Misconduct ruling is silent on intent

From The Embassy of Good Science
Revision as of 10:21, 25 January 2020 by Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Resource |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 s...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Cases

Misconduct ruling is silent on intent

What is this 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 Marc Hauser, a high-flying evolutionary psychologist who resigned from Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 2011, after the university found him guilty of misconduct[1].

Why is this important?

The definition of misconduct can be interpreted in different ways.

For whom is this important?

Other information

Where
Virtues & Values
Good Practices & Misconduct
Research Area
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
5.1.6