Dan L. Burk, law professor at Seton Hall University, wrote ("Legal Process Presented In Ryan Report Requires Reconsideration," The Scientist, Sept. 16, 1996, page 9), "To that end, the major focus of misconduct inquiry by the scientific community will be to determine the empirical demonstrability of a researcher's claims, to purge the record of fabricated or incorrect data, and to discourage future conduct that would tend to corrupt the acquisition of certified knowledge" (emphasis added). The part in italics is weird and unlikely to happen. It would make it legitimate to invent data if one guessed right, and a crime to publish results that cannot be replicated, even if the reason were innocent error by the author or the attempting replicator.

The question scientists ask about misconduct are those asked about any sort of fakery. Was the work actually done? Was it done as described? Was it...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?