Skip to main content

View Diary: Richwine Scandal Recalls Hitler's Ivy League Connections (49 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "Harvard" did not sign off on Reinhart and Rogoff (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG

    Faculty members are free to publish their research whereever they wish - in this case the American Economic Review (not affiliated with Harvard).  

    It's a different case with doctoral dissertations, however.

    The opposite of "good" is "good intention" - Kurt Tucholsky

    by DowneastDem on Sat May 11, 2013 at 12:17:00 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I get that. I have a PhD. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Libby Shaw, blueoasis, OleHippieChick

      However, there is an implicit assumption, like an unspoken contract, that faculty will obey commonly understood rules of the academic profession. If tenured faculty at an institution ignore those standards, is it any wonder if students at the same institution do the same?

      If Harvard does not condemn Reinhart and Rogoff for suppressing evidence that contradicts their thesis, refusing for years to share their data with anyone, and peddling their theories across the globe without ever allowing it to be peer-reviewed, then Harvard shares the guilt of its faculty.

      If faculty are "free" to publish incorrect data with impunity then the very mission of the University, which is to extend and preserve human knowledge, is brought into question.

      It's because I'm an academic that I feel so strongly about this.  

      "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Sat May 11, 2013 at 12:32:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't have a Ph.D (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SouthernLiberalinMD

        but I work at an academic institution as an administrator for a scientific institute.   The faculty of the institute would not take seriously any body of work that avoids peer review.  

        •  I have done pre-publication peer review (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blueoasis, OleHippieChick

          Much of it is a sham. Reviewers in many fields are not expected to opine on the correctness of the reported research or analysis. They are supposed to help it to come up to the standards of comparable research, like citing other relevant research and being adequately written. There are honorable exceptions.

          In the case of respected economics journals, peer review often means only that papers have to present respectable-looking Voodoo, like Baron Samedi in his fine suit and top hat.

          True peer review is done by those who attempt to replicate research, or re-analyze the original dataset, as happened to Reinhardt and Rogoff. Or the Cold Fusion of Fleischman and Ponds.

          Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

          by Mokurai on Sat May 11, 2013 at 02:20:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This may be true, but doesn't excuse R&R (0+ / 0-)

            for not even going through the motions. And now that we've seen the man behind the curtain, Harvard has a responsibility to do something other than wink at their behavior.

            But thanks for the inside dope on the process of peer review and how it's not always the safeguard it seems to be.

            "When people spin this in partisan terms to obfuscate the truth, it does a real disservice to normal people not in the big club in DC. Many of them will be hurting...That is why I write."--priceman

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Mon May 13, 2013 at 08:06:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site