Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Scientific credit and credibility

The verdict returned by an inquiry into scientific misconduct by Bell Labs researchers left many in the community feeling stunned. Where do we go from here?

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Spot the difference.
Figure 2: How much professional responsibility do co-authors share for fraudulent results?

Photos: Bell Labs

References

  1. Chang, K. New York Times May 23 (2002).

  2. http://www.lucent.com/news_events/researchreview.html

  3. Grant, P. Nature 417, 789 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Schön, J.H., Kloc, Ch. & Batlogg, B Appl. Phys. Lett. 77, 3776–3778 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schön, J.H., Kloc, Ch. & Batlogg, B Syn. Metals 122, 195–197 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grant, P. Scientific credit and credibility. Nature Mater 1, 139–141 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat756

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat756

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing