Samuel Wales <samolog...@gmail.com> writes: > As a followup to my last comment, this explains how Stapel > fooled almost everybody and kept raw data hidden: > > > http://chronicle.com/blogs/percolator/the-fraud-who-fooled-almost-everyone/27917 > > And NYT "Fraud Case Seen as a Red Flag for Psychology > Research" which has a raw data take: > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/health/research/noted-dutch-psychologist-stapel-accused-of-research-fraud.html > > Thanks for the videos, Stephen, I will check them out. > > I have been running across scads of fraud stories and interesting > studies on conflict of interest, reliability of research results, etc. > It's all over the place, just scattered and nobody pays much > attention, perhaps not wanting to believe it. > > Reproducible research aims directly at this stuff. Chapeau! > > Samuel I just ran across this article on reproducible research that some of you might find interesting.
http://journal.r-project.org/archive/2011-2/RJournal_2011-2_Lundholm.pdf All the best, Tom -- Thomas S. Dye http://www.tsdye.com
