Michael LaCour’s research showing the enduring effect political canvassers with a personal stake in an issue could potentially have on voters’ opinions was considered groundbreaking when it was published last year in the journal “Science.”
Now, the integrity of LaCour’s research is being questioned after he was recently accused of misrepresenting his methods and not having any evidence to back up his conclusions. LaCour has not spoken publicly yet and has stood by his research in previous statements.
What might the impact to the social sciences community be from the fallout surrounding this study?
you may find our prior coverage of this story here
Ben Carey, science reporter for the New York Times writing about neuroscience, psychiatry and neurology, and everyday psychology. He co-authored a piece that was published Monday on the doubts beginning to arise around Mr. LaCour’s research.
Ivan Oransky, co-founder of Retractionwatch.com, which broke the story about LaCour’s research