Scientific Misconduct and the Myth of Self-Correction in Science.
نویسندگان
چکیده
The recent Stapel fraud case came as a shattering blow to the scientific community of psychologists and damaged both their image in the media and their collective self-esteem. The field responded with suggestions of how fraud could be prevented. However, the Stapel fraud is only one among many cases. Before basing recommendations on one case, it would be informative to study other cases to assess how these frauds were discovered. The authors analyze a convenience sample of fraud cases to see whether (social) psychology is more susceptible to fraud than other disciplines. They also evaluate whether the peer review process and replications work well in practice to detect fraud. There is no evidence that psychology is more vulnerable to fraud than the biomedical sciences, and most frauds are detected through information from whistleblowers with inside information. On the basis of this analysis, the authors suggest a number of strategies that might reduce the risk of scientific fraud.
منابع مشابه
The study of the role of education in controlling scientific misconduct in Iran: using Grounded Theory
The study of the role of education in controlling scientific misconduct in Iran: using Grounded TheoryScientific misconduct in the most general sense is a deliberate violation of methodical and moral norms with the intention of deceiving others. Falsification, fabrication and plagiarism formally had been considered as the main examples of scientific misconduct by some researchers. In recent yea...
متن کاملMisconduct in Research and Publication: a Dilemma That Is Taking Place
Having considered current reports concerning plagiarisms taking place in the global science community, the authors decided to address the principal reasons, which lead to these illegalities. In recent years, misconduct in research, such as plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, guest author, ghost author, self-citation, etc. have been increasing significantly in scientific papers, proving a la...
متن کاملScientific Misconduct: Three Forms that Directly Harm Others as the Modus Operandi of Mill's Tyranny of the Prevailing Opinion
Scientific misconduct is usually assumed to be self-serving. This paper, however, proposes to distinguish between two types of scientific misconduct: 'type one scientific misconduct' is self-serving and leads to falsely positive conclusions about one's own work, while 'type two scientific misconduct' is other-harming and leads to falsely negative conclusions about someone else's work. The focus...
متن کاملThe Position of Myth in Frazer’s Anthropological Theory
George James Frazer (1854-1941), the spiritual father of myth-ritual school, was bred up in the British tradition of empiricism. Believing in the evolutionary process of culture, Frazer mainly focused his attention on explaining such epistemic forms of thought as magic, religion and science. Accordingly, while interpreting the processes through which magic leads to religion and finally evolves ...
متن کاملMeasuring Scientific Misconduct - Lessons from Criminology
This article draws on research traditions and insights from Criminology to elaborate on the problems associated with current practices of measuring scientific misconduct. Analyses of the number of retracted articles are shown to suffer from the fact that the distinct processes of misconduct, detection, punishment, and publication of a retraction notice, all contribute to the number of retractio...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science
دوره 7 6 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2012