Recently, an investigation found evidence of scientific misconduct in Marc Hauser’s laboratory. Marc Hauser is a psychology professor in Harvard Univeristy and a prominent figure in the field of primate behavior and animal cognition. According to the article “Collateral damage”, the human cost of scientific misconduct is huge and Mr. Hauser’s misconduct will have great impact to those researchers who had worked for him. In the article “Document Sheds Light on Investigation at Harvard”, the reporter reveals a copy of the document that was presented to Harvard investigators in 2007. The document shows the story of how the students became convinced that Mr. Hauser was falsifying the data and how they decided to report his misconduct to the university. While the first article argues that Marc Hauser’s scientific conduct will have great collateral damage to the students working for him on future career opportunities, we can infer from the second article that the damage may not be as huge as the first article claims.
In “Collateral damage”, the author is concerned about the damage that Marc Hauser’s scientific misconduct has brought to his students. Marc Hauser’s young researchers are the ones who raised complaint about Hauser’s misconduct and they are facing great professional danger in doing this. The graduates and postgraduates who have pass through Hauser’s hands are now facing an uncertain future. The author is worried that Mr. Hauser’s graduate students would be viewed with suspicion in the future because of their work with Mr. Hauser. Moreover, they would not know how are they going to list their publications with Hauser. Fortunately, Harvard released a report of the investigation stating that Hauser alone was responsible for the misconduct. The author thinks this will ease some burden of Hauser’s young researchers.
In “Document Sheds Light on Investigation at Harvard”, the author emphasizes the courage of the students who brought complaint against Hauser. The Chronicles got a copy of the statement presented to Harvard inverstigator in 2007. According to the document, Mr. Hauser has a history of reporting false data and forcing the students to use those data. It is the experiment on rhesus monkey’s ability to identify sound pattern that brought Mr. Hauser into suspect. The student researcher and Mr. Hauser got the exact opposite results from the same data. While the student found the experiment a failure, Hauser found it a great success. The student suggested Mr. Hauser to have a third party look into the data but Mr. Hauser refused and got annoyed. Then the students watch the videotapes again without Mr. Hauser’s permission and they all found the experiment a failure. They also found Mr. Hauser’s interpretation totally unrelated to the data. That’s how they file complaint to the university and the university start the investigation against Mr. Hauser. This document shows the integrity and courage of the student. Therefore, their future employer should not have any doubt on those students’ credibility even though they had worked for Hauser before.
The second article does not directly disagree with the first one. However, from the documents that the second article provides, we can see the details of how the students expose the professors, so people should not worry about the integrity of those students. Therefore the misconduct of Mr. Hauser does not cause as much collateral damage as the first article claims.
In “Collateral damage”, the author is concerned about the damage that Marc Hauser’s scientific misconduct has brought to his students. Marc Hauser’s young researchers are the ones who raised complaint about Hauser’s misconduct and they are facing great professional danger in doing this. The graduates and postgraduates who have pass through Hauser’s hands are now facing an uncertain future. The author is worried that Mr. Hauser’s graduate students would be viewed with suspicion in the future because of their work with Mr. Hauser. Moreover, they would not know how are they going to list their publications with Hauser. Fortunately, Harvard released a report of the investigation stating that Hauser alone was responsible for the misconduct. The author thinks this will ease some burden of Hauser’s young researchers.
In “Document Sheds Light on Investigation at Harvard”, the author emphasizes the courage of the students who brought complaint against Hauser. The Chronicles got a copy of the statement presented to Harvard inverstigator in 2007. According to the document, Mr. Hauser has a history of reporting false data and forcing the students to use those data. It is the experiment on rhesus monkey’s ability to identify sound pattern that brought Mr. Hauser into suspect. The student researcher and Mr. Hauser got the exact opposite results from the same data. While the student found the experiment a failure, Hauser found it a great success. The student suggested Mr. Hauser to have a third party look into the data but Mr. Hauser refused and got annoyed. Then the students watch the videotapes again without Mr. Hauser’s permission and they all found the experiment a failure. They also found Mr. Hauser’s interpretation totally unrelated to the data. That’s how they file complaint to the university and the university start the investigation against Mr. Hauser. This document shows the integrity and courage of the student. Therefore, their future employer should not have any doubt on those students’ credibility even though they had worked for Hauser before.
The second article does not directly disagree with the first one. However, from the documents that the second article provides, we can see the details of how the students expose the professors, so people should not worry about the integrity of those students. Therefore the misconduct of Mr. Hauser does not cause as much collateral damage as the first article claims.
“Collateral Damage”, Nature(2010). Article: Nature, 26 August 2010.
“Documents Sheds Light on Investigation at Harvard”, http://chronicle.com/article/Document-Sheds-Light-on/123988/
“Documents Sheds Light on Investigation at Harvard”, http://chronicle.com/article/Document-Sheds-Light-on/123988/
No comments:
Post a Comment