首页
登录
职称英语
Rarely does it get much more ironic. Marc Hauser, a professor of psychology
Rarely does it get much more ironic. Marc Hauser, a professor of psychology
游客
2024-12-23
24
管理
问题
Rarely does it get much more ironic. Marc Hauser, a professor of psychology at Harvard who made his name probing the evolutionary origins of morality, is suspected of having committed the closest thing academia has to a deadly sin: cheating. It is not the first time the scientific world has been rocked by scandal. But the present furore, involving as it does a prestigious university and one of its star professors, will echo through common rooms and quadrangles far and wide.
The story broke when the Boston Globe revealed that Dr. Hauser had been under investigation since 2007 for alleged misconduct at Harvard’s Cognitive Evolution Laboratory, which he heads. This investigation has resulted in the retraction of an oft-cited study published in 2002 in Cognition, the publication last month of a correction to a paper from 2007 in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, and doubts about the validity of findings published in Science, also in 2007. Dr. Hauser was the only author common to all three papers.
An article in the Chronicle of Higher Education added further spice. It offered unsettling accounts by anonymous graduate students and research assistants depicting Dr. Hauser as brusquely dismissive of their attempts to discuss possible improprieties in data collection and interpretation.
This prompted Michael Smith, the hitherto taciturn dean of Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences, to react. In an open letter to the faculty, he confirmed that an internal investigation had found Dr. Haus-er "solely responsible" for eight instances of scientific misconduct, involving the three published papers and five other pieces of research. On the same day, Dr. Hauser, who is on leave and refusing to be interviewed, issued a single contrite statement apologising for having made some "significant mistakes". These would not be his first. So far, none of this constitutes conclusive evidence of fraud. Slapdash lab work is not the same as fabricating data and Harvard has kept mum about the precise nature of the charges, citing concerns about privacy. Many researchers, however, fear that this silence itself makes things worse and not just for Dr. Hauser and Harvard. The uncertainty about which of his results (for he has been a prolific researcher) are up to snuff means others in the field are finding it hard to decide what to rely on in their own work. And despite Dr. Hauser’s professed sole responsibility, a sizeable number of his present and former wards may unfairly be tainted by association.
At the least, then, Dr. Hauser stands accused of setting the study of animal cognition back many years. Trying to discern an animal’s thought processes on the basis of its behaviour is notoriously tricky and subjective at the best of times. Now, his critics fear, no one will take it seriously.As Greg Laden, one of Dr. Hauser’s former colleagues, laments in a blog, "the hubris and selfishness of one person can do more in the form of damage than an entire productive career can do in the way of building of our collective credibility."
Others are less depressed, warning against conflating scientific misconduct with difficult science. One corner-cutting researcher does not impugn a whole field. Clive Wynne, editor of Behavioural Processes, which published an "obsessively" immaculate paper by Dr. Hauser three days before the Globe’s revelations, says he is struck by how meticulous recent research in his discipline has been.
In general, scientists see themselves better placed than most to weed out cheats. The more startling a paper’s claims, the more likely it is that others will try to replicate it and, if the claims were plausible, fail. Moreover, scientists want their work to be replicated; it is the only way it will stand the test of time, observes Robert Seyfarth.a primatologist and Dr. Hauser’s former mentor.
Many researchers cite Harvard’s probe as further proof of science’s self-correcting mechanisms, and praise students for doughtily standing up to an authority figure of Dr. Hauser’s distinction. Gerry Alt-mann, editor of Cognition, agrees, adding:"Although at the time it might appear that each transgression is majorats eventual impact on science is minor." [br] It can be inferred from the passage that
选项
A、Dr. Hauser’s misconduct was probably disclosed by his students.
B、researchers often tend to startle the public with unexpected claims.
C、Dr. Hauser’s published papers were considered too good to be true.
D、according to Gerry Altmann.Dr. Hauser’s influence will disappear.
答案
A
解析
推断题。末段首句指出“Many researchers cite Harvard’s probe as further proof of science’sself-correcting mechanisms,and praise students for doughtily standing up to an authority figure ofDr.Hauser’s distinction.”,从“学生勇敢地挑战Hauser博士盛名下的权威形象”可以得出[A],故为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3881443.html
相关试题推荐
AdamSmith,theScottishprofessorofmoralphilosophy,wasthrilledbyhisr
AdamSmith,theScottishprofessorofmoralphilosophy,wasthrilledbyhisr
AdamSmith,theScottishprofessorofmoralphilosophy,wasthrilledbyhisr
[originaltext]INTERVIEWER:ProfessorMcKay,canyoutellmewhatyouthinkyour
[originaltext]INTERVIEWER:ProfessorMcKay,canyoutellmewhatyouthinkyour
[originaltext]INTERVIEWER:ProfessorMcKay,canyoutellmewhatyouthinkyour
Rarelydoesitgetmuchmoreironic.MarcHauser,aprofessorofpsychology
AccordingtoProfessorDanielePiomelli,humansdeveloped______.[br][original
Whichcanbecalleda"seastead"accordingtoprofessorPetrie’sdefinition?[br
Whichcanbecalleda"seastead"accordingtoprofessorPetrie’sdefinition?[br
随机试题
FiveMythsaboutCollegeDebt[A]Thetrillion-dollarstudentdebtburden
治疗月经先后无定期肾虚证,应首选的方剂是( )。A.逍遥散 B.固阴煎 C
胎膜早破是指胎膜破裂发生在A.临产前 B.临产后 C.宫口开大4~5cm时
在以下选项中,关于争议的解决方式说法错误的是:() a.张三欠李四2000
中药饮片贮存条件要求A.饮片含水量7%~13% B.室温25℃以下 C.门窗
下列关于留存收益筹资的说法中,不正确的是()。A.筹资途径包括资本公积、盈余公
高强度大六角头螺栓正确的连接要求是()。2016A.螺栓不能自由穿入螺栓孔是用气
在当天成型的沥青混合料路面上,()停放任何机械设备或车辆。A.可以 B.有条
根据《建筑工程建筑面积计算规范》(GB/T50353-2013),带幕墙建筑物的
关于国际工程工程变更范围,下列不构成变更的是()。A.任何工作的质量或其他特性的
最新回复
(
0
)