I don't think her instances of plagerism warranted
by fontoknow (2024-01-04 17:11:44)

In reply to: I think, when you look closely, her testimony before  posted by Barrister

Cannot Reply Return to Political

the scrutiny they recieved. Nobody got tenure writing a good lit review or data and methods section. Almost all of her published work, including those appearing in APSR and AJPS, two of the most imprortant journals in the discipline, utilized a methodological approach called "Ecological Inference" that was developed by her Disertation chair, Gary King. It's not shocking that she used the same, even identicle, language used by King in papers and articles to describe the approach. Lit Reviews are really attempts to tell the audience why the thing you are going to do next is important and fits into a thematic narrative. I lean toward synthesis in my lit reviews instead, but I'm not super concerned with the allegations of plagerism in Gay's lit reviews.

You mention Stanford's president being forced out this summer. His research misconduct is far more severe (Gay's sins were more of the venial variety) as he fabricated data to support his conclussions. Those conclussions lead to people chasing down rabit holes on theraputics that weren't warranted.



Replies: