A few weeks ago I read a gruesome but fascinating article about science gone wrong. In an ethical violation of the worst kind, reknowned stuttering research pioneer, Wendell Johnson designed a cruel study. He used one of his students to do the dirty work on orphans. Today it is Yahoo's most emailed story. Some of the harmed orphans, elderly by now, are suing the University. Here is a good summary of the story. The student who carried out the experiments (now in her 80s) justified it by saying it was a small price to pay for science and the countless numbers the study helped. Perhaps she forgot that the study did not support the hypothesis of Wendell Johnson. Yet he went ahead to publish his thesis without mention of the study. Ostensibly the omission was not due to the cruelty of the study, which he seemed to be oblivious to. It was omitted because it did not support his theory. His thesis got worldwide acclaim and acceptance. Therefore not only was it cruel and detrimental to the orphans, but the results were ignored at a cost to future stutterers who received treatment on the basis of a flawed thesis. To my understanding, today experts in the field accept a modified version of Wendell's hypothesis...
