I posted this on another thread, but it belongs here too:
http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/689.full.pdf html
This one is particularly interesting. DSM-V is claiming a new psychiatric disorder, it sounds familiar:
DSM-5 Task Force Proposes Controversial
Diagnosis for Dishonest Scientists
Matthew J. Gullo1 and John G. O’Gorman2
[Alex: these researchers are based in my two universities that I studied at]
The essential feature of pathological publishing is the “persistent
and recurrent publishing of confirmatory findings (Criterion
A) combined with a callous disregard for null results
(Criterion B) that produces a “good story” (Criterion C), leading
to marked distress in neo-Popperians (Criterion D).” Diana
Gleslo, M.D., who chairs the task force developing the fifth
edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM-V), said the new diagnosis will help combat
the emerging epidemic of scientists engaging in questionable
research practices. “The evidence is overwhelming,” Gleslo
told reporters. “We can no longer dismiss this as merely ‘a
few bad apples’ trying to further their career. This is a medical
condition—one we fear may be highly infectious.”
Alex again. This very claim is a whole chapter in my book. I was claiming it as a philosophical failure, and yes I am a neo-Popperian (actually a pan critical rationalist). It is highly amusing to me that DSM-V classifies it as a psychiatric disorder.
Bye, Alex