The fascination for scientific misconduct is as old as science itself, however, the sociology of science has only scratched the surface of the phenomenon. Some historical examples can illustrate the multiple ways in which science and misconduct are implicated: As a practical epistemical problem, the founders of the Royal Society were highly interested in who can be trusted as a reliable truth-teller and who may have ulterior motives. As a means of power, the dispute over who invented calculus between Leibniz and Newton featured some hefty accusations of plagiarism. In a more reflective and political mode, Charles Babbage, in 1830, feared science to be declining and provided one of the first typologies of scientific misconduct. In journalism, the misconduct of those that we expect to be dispassionate and unbiased seekers of truth is of seemingly timeless public interest, albeit with varying degrees of sensationalism. Finally, as an object of scientific study, Robert K. Mertons work on priority disputes and the ambivalence of scientists laid the foundation for understanding science from its fringes: when knowledge claims are contested and when the scientific ethos fails. However, he also declared the history of science as comparatively free from misconduct, so much so, that little might be learned from studying it.

中文翻译：

---

研究中的欺诈和不当行为：检测、调查和组织响应。作者：Nachman Ben-Yehuda 和 Amalya Oliver-Lumerman。安娜堡：密歇根大学出版社，2017 年。Pp。十二+266。75.00 美元。

对科学不端行为的迷恋与科学本身一样古老，然而，科学社会学只是触及了这一现象的表面。一些历史例子可以说明涉及科学和不端行为的多种方式：作为一个实际的认识问题，皇家学会的创始人对谁可以被信任为可靠的说真话的人以及谁可能有不可告人的动机非常感兴趣。作为一种权力手段，莱布尼茨和牛顿之间关于谁发明了微积分的争论以一些严重的抄袭指控为特征。1830 年，查尔斯·巴贝奇 (Charles Babbage) 以一种更具反思性和政治性的方式担心科学会衰落，并提供了最早的科学不端行为类型之一。在新闻业，我们期望冷静和公正的真理寻求者的不当行为似乎是永恒的公共利益，尽管具有不同程度的耸人听闻。最后，作为科学研究的对象，罗伯特·K·默顿 (Robert K. Mertons) 在优先权争议和科学家的矛盾心理方面的工作奠定了从边缘理解科学的基础：当知识主张受到质疑时，以及当科学精神失败时。然而，他也宣称科学史相对来说没有不端行为，以至于从研究中学到的东西很少。当知识主张受到质疑和科学精神失败时。然而，他也宣称科学史相对来说没有不端行为，以至于从研究中学到的东西很少。当知识主张受到质疑和科学精神失败时。然而，他也宣称科学史相对来说没有不端行为，以至于从研究中学到的东西很少。