Were you buying it when Diederik Stapel of Tilburg University in the Netherlands claimed meat was behind all the aggression we humans have? Vegetarians were, sure, along with plenty of other anti-science hippies when a supposed study matches their world view and gives them a jolt of dopamine, but most of us just shook our heads.
Stapel also did a study claiming scientists discriminated more if their labs were messy. Really, psychologists can lament they are not taken more seriously but they did little to police their own - until recently. Marc Hauser was forced to resign, Satoshi Kanazawa finally got the ridicule he deserved, and now an investigation shows Stapel committed data fraud in dozens of publications and even 2/3rds of the theses he supervised were 'tainted'.
He has apologized and said he "failed as a scientist" but we have to give him a break on that one; he was never a scientist so he could not have succeeded anyway.
"People are in shock," Gerben van Kleef, a social psychologist at the University of Amsterdam, told Gretchen Vogel at Science. Really? If I take an informal poll of Science 2.0 contributors, no biologist or geologist or physicist is going to be shocked. How are social psychologists surprised by something everyone else knew?
Generally, surveys of students are rubbish anyway but Stapel took it to a whole special level; he didn't even bother to do any. He just made up the results and when he did any surveys at all he still made up the results. It's almost like he was laughing at people in his own field, or maybe he wanted to be the Tiger Woods of Social Psychology fraud and see how much he could get away with.
Why didn't they catch it sooner, even after people raised concern levels? Unlike physics or biology, social psychology is too scientifically fuzzy to say someone is wrong or demand data; if his results weren't replicated, other researchers assumed they were doing something wrong.
Gosh, I hope his study claiming that we use better manners if a wine glass is on the dinner table isn't on the questionable list. I changed my whole life based on that one. Who am I kidding? All of his studies are probably fraudulent. The University of Amsterdam is even going back to his Ph.D. work.
It may seem like this is a real crushing blow for social psychology, like the Catholic church trying to be more liberal and rehabilitating pederasts and getting busted for it, but it is just the opposite - the fact that social psychology is now demanding accountability because junior researchers are blowing the whistle on senior people, no matter how famous they are, is a very good sign.
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- M60-UCD1: Tiny Galaxy, Supermassive Black Hole
- Witness The Singularity AI Nanotech Co-Evolutionary Merger
- Dark Matter Is A Bose-Einstein Condensate?
- John Ellis On The Ascent Of The Standard Model
- No books for you! City Colleges of Chicago Students.
- New Land, Fewer Harvests? The Possible Future Of Global Agriculture
- Theory Of Externalities, And Why We’ve Come To Hate Tech Companies
- "And unfortunately they were right...."
- "Jerry has always been a Science 2.0 favorite, he has one of three books I endorse on my profile..."
- "Even the Chicago Cubs are going to win another World Series at some point, the laws of probability..."
- "My main issue with all of this unnatural gene modification is the contamination factor. Is this..."
- Single dose of antidepressant changes the brain
- Gambling with confidence: Are you sure about that?
- Stem cells use 'first aid kits' to repair damage
- NYU Langone scientists report reliable and highly efficient method for making stem cells
- The war on leukemia: How the battle for cell production could be decisive