Difference between revisions of "Resource:Af266b39-20a3-4b97-a876-08eebb428fe6"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Resource | {{Resource | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
| − | |Title=Misconduct | + | |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 | + | |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. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | This is a factual case. | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
|Important Because=The definition of misconduct can be interpreted in different ways. | |Important Because=The definition of misconduct can be interpreted in different ways. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Important For=researchers; phd students; research leaders | |Important For=researchers; phd students; research leaders | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 18: | Line 10: | ||
|Has Link=https://www.nature.com/news/misconduct-ruling-is-silent-on-intent-1.11390 | |Has Link=https://www.nature.com/news/misconduct-ruling-is-silent-on-intent-1.11390 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{Related To}} | + | {{Related To |
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
|Involves=Marc Hauser | |Involves=Marc Hauser | ||
Revision as of 20:02, 26 May 2020
ResourcesCases
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 a high-flying evolutionary psychologist who resigned from Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 2011, after the university found him guilty of misconduct[1]. This is a factual case.
- ↑ Reich, Eugenie Samuel. "Misconduct ruling is silent on intent." Nature 489.7415 (2012): 189.
Why is this important?
The definition of misconduct can be interpreted in different ways.
