Scientific Misconduct and the Myth of Self-Correction in Science
Scientific Misconduct and the Myth of Self-Correction in Science
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1745691612460687
复制
发表时间：
2012-11-01
影响因子：
12.6
通讯作者：
Spears, Russell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Stroebe, Wolfgang;Postmes, Tom;Spears, Russell
最近的Stapel欺诈案对心理学家的科学界来说是一个沉重的打击，损害了他们在媒体上的形象和集体自尊。外地办事处提出了如何防止欺诈的建议。然而，Stapel欺诈案只是众多案件之一。在根据一个案例提出建议之前，研究其他案例以评估如何发现这些欺诈行为将是有益的。作者分析了一个方便的欺诈案件样本，看看（社会）心理学是否比其他学科更容易受到欺诈的影响。他们还评估同行审查过程和复制在实践中是否能很好地发现欺诈。没有证据表明心理学比生物医学更容易受到欺诈，大多数欺诈都是通过内部消息的举报人发现的。在此分析的基础上，作者提出了一些可能降低科学欺诈风险的策略。
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.