Research accomplishments that are too good to be true
We are all proud of successes in scientific research. Society at large expects to reap great benefits from these breakthroughs. However, sometimes research accomplishments are just too good to be true: single studies with extravagant results, investigators with too spectacular sudden changes in their career trajectory, or even whole scientific fields where exaggeration becomes a spurious norm. The boundaries between these three levels are hazy, because multiple single studies build investigator CVs and multiple investigators build scientific fields. How do we differentiate spurious success from true excellence? Let us examine a few vignettes of different situations.
Vignette 1: A famous professor states (verbatim) in his inaugural speech on being installed in a prestigious university: “The freedom we have in the design of our experiments is so enormous that when an experiment does not give us what we are looking for, we blame the experiment, not our theory. (At least, that is the way...
KeywordsLegalistic Pressure Research Accomplishment Report Correlation Coefficient Hydroxylethyl Questionable Research Practice
Conflicts of interest
The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.
- 1.Enserick M. Scientific ethics. Final report on Stapel also blames field as a whole. Science 338:1270–1271Google Scholar
- 3.Bhattacharjeet V. The mind of a con man. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html?_r=0. Accessed August 29, 2013