Over nearly two decades, the Office of Scientific Integrity has documented cases of scientific misconduct associated with NIH-funded research. 90% of these cases involve fraud. A recent study examined these cases in more detail to learn more about the people involved. Two interesting observations emerge. First, misconduct is distributed among career stages. Second, the proportion of male scientists committing misconduct exceeds their representation in the scientific workforce. Could this reflect gender differences in risk tolerance?
Who is blogging?
-
-
Join 13 other subscribers
- Academic medicine
- Academic publishing
- Biomedical Engineering
- Body language
- California
- Campaigns and Elections
- Clayman Institute for Gender Research
- Deborah Jordan Brooks
- doctorate recipients
- Elise Andrew
- Employment
- Family
- Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993
- female candidates
- FInancial Literacy
- Gender studies
- GIN@Stanford
- gin group
- Job Search
- Jo Handelsman
- Lean IN
- Leave of absence
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- McCormick
- Non-verbal communication
- Nonverbal communication
- Parent
- Parental leave
- Part-time
- Peer review
- politics
- Popular science
- Psychology
- research
- Research careers
- Risk aversion
- science
- Science careers
- Science communication
- Science in Society
- Scientific misconduct
- Social science
- Stanford
- Stanford Graduate School of Business
- Stanford University School of Medicine
- STEM fields
- Stress hormone
- Tissue engineering
- Unconsicous Bias
- United States
- United States Office of Research Integrity
- Vocal register
- Voice and Influence
- Women in science
Archives
Meta
Gender Issues in Neuroscience (GIN) 
I was looking for this statement, and I am glad I found it: “We cannot exclude the possibility that females commit research misconduct as frequently as males but are less likely to be detected.” It would be a shame if eventually the tables are turned so drastically that sexism towards males will be a problem.