On Fraud.¶
Bright, L. K. (2017). On Fraud. Philosophical Studies, 174(2), 291-310.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Epistemic Justice
- T6 — Epistemic Justice in Academic Publishing and Citation Politics. Pohlhaus (2017), Bright (2017)
This sourceSocial-epistemology analysis of scientific fraud and the credit/reward economy of science within the veritistic ideal. (Citation-fix: the prime's prior definition gave the title as 'On Fraud and the Erasure of Labour' in the Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice — no such chapter exists
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
Bright's 'On Fraud' supplies the epistemic-incentive half of T6 — fraud and the credit/reward economy of publication — but says nothing about citation politics or epistemic injustice.
“Preferably scientific investigations would promote true rather than false beliefs. The phenomenon of fraud represents a standing challenge to this veritistic ideal. When scientists publish fraudulent results they knowingly enter falsehoods into the information stream of science.”
- T6 — Epistemic Justice in Academic Publishing and Citation Politics. Pohlhaus (2017), Bright (2017)
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:97000232afd5 · see in the full table