Taint of Misbehavior - Print: The Chronicle: 2

icon

5

pages

icon

Français

icon

Documents

Écrit par

Publié par

Lire un extrait
Lire un extrait

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus

Découvre YouScribe et accède à tout notre catalogue !

Je m'inscris

Découvre YouScribe et accède à tout notre catalogue !

Je m'inscris
icon

5

pages

icon

Français

icon

Documents

Lire un extrait
Lire un extrait

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus

Taint of Misbehavior - Print: The Chronicle: 2
Voir icon arrow

Publié par

Langue

Français

9/5/08 2:55 PM
Print: The Chronicle: 2/24/2006: The Taint of 'Misbehavior'
Page 1 of 5
file:///Users/bbenham/Projects/Casebook/Chap%205%20Authorship/Author,%20taint%20of%20misbehavior.webarchive
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v52/i25/25a01401.htm
From the issue dated February 24, 2006
The Taint of 'Misbehavior'
A report on an American scientist's role in the Korean stem-cell scandal says he was unaware of the
fraud — but should have been suspicious
By LILA GUTERMAN
When word of research misdeeds in the laboratory of a famous South Korean stem-cell researcher spread
late last year, the small country reverberated with shock, anger, and dismay — as well as with the proud
defense of Woo Suk Hwang, the researcher considered by many to be a national hero but now known to
have committed fraud.
Newspaper articles and television reports appeared nearly daily, containing new revelations broadcast in
South Korea and throughout the world.
By contrast, Dr. Hwang's American collaborator, who served as senior author on his most recent paper,
received almost no attention from the American news media. Gerald P. Schatten, director of the division of
developmental and regenerative medicine at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, refused to
speak publicly until the university's investigation of his conduct was complete. Pitt did the same.
Now the university's six-member panel has produced a report exonerating Mr. Schatten of any research
misconduct. Yet he continues to remain silent, and Pitt has said that the report itself will be the extent of its
comment on the scandal.
Perhaps their taciturnity derives from the panel's having reprimanded Mr. Schatten for lesser violations. He
had committed "research misbehavior," the panel said, an ill-defined concept in the annals of science.
In a summary of its findings, the panel said Mr. Schatten had "shirked" responsibilities that lay with him as
senior author of an article that has since been found to be a fraud. His actions, the report said, represented "a
serious failure that facilitated the publication of falsified experiments" in the influential journal
Science,
and
one that might warrant new language in Pitt's ethical rules to cover authors' responsibilities.
The report also criticized Mr. Schatten for having enjoyed credit for the breakthrough research finding, but
then having tried to evade all blame when the study turned out to be fraudulent.
"Authorship isn't just credit; it's responsibility," commented Drummond Rennie, a professor of medicine at
the University of California at San Francisco and a deputy editor of the
Journal of the American Medical
Association,
in an interview.
Voir icon more
Alternate Text