Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scientific credit and credibility

  • Commentary
  • Published:

From Nature Materials

View current issue Submit your manuscript

The verdict returned by an inquiry into scientific misconduct by Bell Labs researchers left many in the community feeling stunned. Where do we go from here?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1: Spot the difference.
Figure 2: How much professional responsibility do co-authors share for fraudulent results?

Photos: Bell Labs

References

  1. Chang, K. New York Times May 23 (2002).

  2. http://www.lucent.com/news_events/researchreview.html

  3. Grant, P. Nature 417, 789 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Schön, J.H., Kloc, Ch. & Batlogg, B Appl. Phys. Lett. 77, 3776–3778 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schön, J.H., Kloc, Ch. & Batlogg, B Syn. Metals 122, 195–197 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. science fellow at the Electric Power Research Institute, 3412 Hillview Avenue, PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, 94303, California, USA

    Paul M. Grant

  2. IBM Research Staff Member Emeritus,

    Paul M. Grant

Authors
  1. Paul M. Grant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grant, P. Scientific credit and credibility. Nature Mater 1, 139–141 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat756

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat756

  • Springer Nature Limited

Search

Navigation