Re: [asa] Nature: Peer Review Trial and Debate

On 6/15/06, Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com> wrote:

> The reason why open review has become a hot topic is some famous fraud
> cases. Normal peer review is not a good guard against this and I don't
> see open review doing any better. In time, fraud works itself out as
> results do not get replicated. This latter part is underappreciated by
> most lay people. They see something in the scientific press and only
> see when the first reports come out before they are replicated. In the
> scientific community it is only when the results are replicated that
> it has credence. For example, J Hendrik Schoen had fradulent papers in
> nanotechnology which needed to be withdrawn in part because they
> couldn't be replicated at IBM's TJ Watson lab. Randy, were you
> involved with this when you were with IBM?

This requires a bit of public disclosure on my part. Jan Schoen was
working for Bell Labs. During the early 90s I worked for AT&T GIS, nee
NCR. I don't believe our tenures at AT&T overlapped.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jun 15 13:36:09 2006