麻豆淫院

Science strives to produce reliable knowledge, advance our understanding of the world, and ultimately drive progress. This pursuit depends not only on individual excellence but also on collaboration, exchange, and support within the scientific community.

While publishing flawed or fraudulent research often leads to reputational penalties for its authors, it remains unclear whether misconduct unrelated to research integrity鈥攂ut harmful to the community鈥攑rompts a similar response. A new study now provides important findings for addressing sexual misconduct and strengthening scientific and social norms in science.

The study by Rainer Widmann, Michael E. Rose, and Marina Chugunova, now in The Review of Economics and Statistics, has examined the question of whether the scientific community not only sanctions "bad science," but also "bad citizenship." The authors focus on sexual misconduct, which is prevalent in academia as in other fields. The study is the first to provide systematic and causal evidence on the consequences of sexual misconduct for perpetrators.

Data and approach

The researchers constructed a dataset of 210 scientists at research-intensive universities in the United States across all disciplines against whom allegations of sexual misconduct have been made public between 1998 and 2019.

In their analysis, they track citations to articles by alleged perpetrators that were published prior to allegations, and compare them to the citations received by other articles that stem from the same journal issue. To examine the consequences of allegations against the accused, they were matched to a set of observationally similar scientists.

The results of the study

The authors found that the scientific community cites prior work of alleged perpetrators less after allegations of sexual misconduct surface.

Co-authorship networks play a role in spreading the information about the misconduct and mediate the response of other researchers: Researchers who are very close to the perpetrator in the co-authorship network (e.g., former co-authors) react the strongest and reduce their citations the most. The effect is particularly strong for close male peers. The effect is muted in more male-dominated fields, suggesting that field culture shapes responses to misconduct.

Comparing the results of the new study to previously found citation penalties for scientific misconduct, the magnitudes appear similarly sized. Finally, the authors document that alleged perpetrators face palpable career consequences: they publish and collaborate less following the allegations, and they are more likely to quit academic research altogether.

Conclusions and societal impact

The findings show that the scientific community responds to sexual misconduct even though such misconduct does not cast doubt on the validity of the scientific findings of the accused. The study thus provides an important impetus for the discussion on how to address misconduct and strengthen professional norms in science.

The results are particularly important given the increasingly collaborative and social nature of modern research. The study offers evidence relevant for professional organizations seeking to strengthen scientific and social norms.