Lo, behold, &c.:

This study reports the results of a survey of professional, mostly academic economists about their research norms and scientific misbehavior. Behavior such as data fabrication or plagiarism are (almost) unanimously rejected and admitted by less than 4% of participants. Research practices that are often considered “questionable,” e.g., strategic behavior while analyzing results or in the publication process, are rejected by at least 60%. Despite their low justifiability, these behaviors are widespread. Ninety-four percent report having engaged in at least one unaccepted research practice. Surveyed economists perceive strong pressure to publish. The level of justifiability assigned to different misdemeanors does not increase with the perception of pressure. However, perceived pressure is found to be positively related to the admission of being involved in several unaccepted research practices. Although the results cannot prove causality, they are consistent with the notion that the “publish or perish” culture motivates researchers to violate research norms.

I had a philosophy professor who said that economics wasn't a real science...

I heard (DANGER DANGER: ANECDOTE APPROACHING!!!) a while back that sort of thing with regards to unusual claims made in published papers (I want to say they focused mostly on biology, could be wrong tho) which other researchers failed to reproduce. I think the story was about scientific journals' peer review protocols being called into question. As I think about it more I'm all but certain I got the link in #isharia.

Quality control in biology has been a hot topic for the last couple of years, largely in the wake of several prominent fraud cases (e.g. human cloning), rising proficiency in Photoshop (e.g. doctored gel images), and shots fired regarding the use and abuse of the almighty p-value. However, I don't think any of the estimates on flawed or improper research in biology can hope to hold a candle to the abomination reported here.

Personally I'm going to take it with a modest grain of salt—after all, the author could be on a vendetta to defund the economics department at her university and might very well be prone to shoddy procedure as well—but that doesn't really detract from how staggering the suggestion is.

did you know that ideology

you money?

"Economists: the worst people ever?"

Only after postmodern town planners.

quoting Izambri:

"Economists: the worst people ever?"

Only after postmodern town planners.

they probably consider themselves 'political economists'

political economists
those are worse

i see your postmodern town planners and i raise you praxeologists.

I have never met an economist. How do they look like? What do they eat?

Human; they frequently wear glasses. Food.

Mostly like mathematicians. Mostly. Occasionally conspicuously wealthy.

Catalan economists, at least, look a lot like Catalan mathematicians. With one difference: economists here dress slightly better than the others.

Only slightly, I insist, and there are exceptions. It's not due to an improved sense of aesthetics among economists, but assiduously going to TV news programs and debates has that effect in them.

quoting Rhetorica:

Mostly like mathematicians. Mostly. Occasionally conspicuously wealthy.

So, very much like serial killer-rapists?

No: they never return their video tapes.

the kind i am most familiar with are internet contrarians

awful folk