Week 1: Ungraded

review questions
Can you explain your answer?

 Use your fingers to indicate your answer:

1=A, 2=B, 3=C, 4=D.
 After viewing the question, show me your
answer in 15 seconds.
 Next, turn to your neighbor and you have
one minute to convince him/her that you
are right.
Real case: Mary found ten references from the library.
In the entire paper she only made a direct quotation
from each reference. Each original passage is put inside
a pair of direct quotation marks. The professor turned
down her paper, but Mary argued that she didn’t violate
any academic honesty policy. Is she right?

A. Yes, she followed all the citation protocols of

APA.
B. No, it is still plagiarism.
C. It is not considered research misconduct.
However, even though she cited the sources
correctly, she didn’t write her own paper.
Real case: After the September 11 attack Professor Ward Churchill
wrote an essay to declare that the 911 attack was an unavoidable
consequence of unjust US foreign policies. He asserted that
smallpox was intentionally spread to Native Americans as a tool of
genocide. In 2005 the University of Colorado charged him of
research misconduct (fabrication and falsification of history), and
then fired him. Did U. of Colorado make the right decision?

A. No, research misconduct is not about academic disagreement

or debate.
B. Yes, research misconduct represents a significant departure
from the truth, including historical truth.
C. It depends on whether the misrepresentation is intentional or
unintentional.
D. Too complicated to tell
Which of the following is NOT
considered research misconduct?

A. Fabrication
B. Falsification
C. Plagiarism
D. Misclassification
Which of the following studies is an
example of conflicts of interest?

A. Sugar study by Ancel Keys.

B. The relationship between autism and vaccine by
Wakefield.
C. Study of DNA structure by Watson and Crick
D. Stanley Miller’s experiment