Cogprints

Cheating in Management Science (with Comments by M. K. Starr and M. J. Mahoney)

Armstrong, J. Scott (1983) Cheating in Management Science (with Comments by M. K. Starr and M. J. Mahoney). [Journal (Paginated)]

Full text available as:

[img]
Preview
PDF
143Kb

Abstract

Honesty is vital to scientific work and, clearly, most scientists are honest. However, recent publicity about cases involving cheating, including cases of falsification of data and plagiarism, raises some questions: Is cheating a problem? Does it affect management science? Should anything be done?

Item Type:Journal (Paginated)
Subjects:Psychology > Behavioral Analysis
ID Code:5180
Deposited By:Armstrong, J. Scott
Deposited On:25 Sep 2006
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:56

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

Armstrong, J. Scott (1979), “Advocacy and objectivity in science,” Management Science, 25 (5), 423-428.

Bozarth, H. D. and R. R. Roberts, Jr. (1972), “Signifying significant significance,” American Psychologist, 27 (8), 774-775.

Broad, William J. (1982), “Yale announces plan to handle charges of fraud,” Science, 218, No. 4567 (October 1), 37.

Broad, William and Nicholas Wade (1982), Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Chamberlin, T. C. (1890), “The method of multiple working hypotheses,” reprinted in Science, 148, No. 3671 (May 7), 1965, 754-759.

Craig, James R. and Sandra C. Reese (1973), “Retention of raw data: A problem revisited,” American Psychologist, 28 (8), 723.

DuShane, G. et al. (1961), “An unfortunate event,” Science, 134, No. 3483, 945-946.

Harvard Gazette (1982), “Medical school dean releases report on falsification of research data,” January 29, pp. 1 and 11-12.

Hamill, Ruth, T. D. Wilson, R. E. Nisbett, (1980), “Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (4), 578-589.

Kahneman, Daniel, P. Slovic, and A. Tversky (1982), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kerr, Steven, J. Tolliver, and D. Petree(1977), “Manuscript characteristics which influence acceptance for management and social science journals,” Academy of Management Journal, 20 (1), 132-141.

Mitroff, Ian (1972), “The myth of objectivity, or why science needs a new psychology of science,” Science, 18 (3), B613-B618.

Nader, Ralph, P. Petkas, and Kate Blackwell (1972), Whistle Blowing: The Report of the Conference on Professional Responsibility. New York: Grossman Publishing.

Reid, Leonard N., L. C. Soley, and R. D. Wimmer (1981), “Replication in advertising research: 1977, 1978,

1979,” Journal of Advertising, 10 (1), 3-13.

Reid, Leonard N., H. J. Rotfield, and R. D. Wimmer (1982), “How researchers respond to replication

requests,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (2), 216-218.

Samelson, Franz (1980), “J. B. Watson’s Little Albert, Cyril Burt’s Twins and the need for a critical science,”

American Psychologist, 35 (7), 619-625.

South, R. Jeffrey (1982), “Scientists implicated in atom test deception,” Science, 218, No. 4572 (Nov. 5), 545-

547.

St. James-Roberts, Ian (1976), “Cheating in science,” New Scientist, 72, No. 1028 (November 25), 466-469.

Wade, Nicholas (1973), “Physicians who falsify drug data,” Science, 180, No. 4090 (June 8), 1038.

Wolins, Leroy (1962), “Responsibility for raw data,” American Psychologist, 17 (9), 657-658. Yale University, Policy Statement on Collaborative Research, May 23, 1982

Zirkle, Conway (1954), “Citation of fraudulent data,” Science, 120 (August 6), 189-190.

Metadata

Repository Staff Only: item control page