> Dan Ariely, professor of business administration in the Fuqua School of Business, is once again under scrutiny after an article released Monday found evidence that he likely tampered with or fabricated data in an influential 2002 research paper on procrastination.
> The findings — published in Data Colada, a blog run by three esteemed behavioral science professors that investigates and replicates academic research — identified four key “red flags” in the study’s data, which suggested the results were not possible without interference.
> “We are unable to generate a benign explanation for all of the anomalies presented here,” the professors wrote. “Based on this evidence, we believe the data for Study 2 of Ariely and Wertenbroch (2002) were severely tampered with or fabricated to produce the desired results.”
> Dan Ariely, professor of business administration in the Fuqua School of Business, is once again under scrutiny after an article released Monday found evidence that he likely tampered with or fabricated data in an influential 2002 research paper on procrastination.
> The findings — published in Data Colada, a blog run by three esteemed behavioral science professors that investigates and replicates academic research — identified four key “red flags” in the study’s data, which suggested the results were not possible without interference.
> “We are unable to generate a benign explanation for all of the anomalies presented here,” the professors wrote. “Based on this evidence, we believe the data for Study 2 of Ariely and Wertenbroch (2002) were severely tampered with or fabricated to produce the desired results.”