Dan Ariely remaining at Duke, after it has become clear that much if not most of his work is fraudulent, is at least as big a black mark for Duke as Jason Arday was for Cambridge.

Not to mention the Epstein ties.

▲

dash2 a day ago | parent | next [-]

It's arguably worse. Jason Arday was doing qualitative work in education. Nobody pays any attention to anything UK educationalists write. Dan Ariely was a genuine superstar and writer of popular bestsellers (with academic content).

	▲	suddenlybananas 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I agree Ariely was more influential and his fraud more flagrant (obviously Arday's lies were more absurd, but they were less academically relevant), but it's not true that Arday had no attention given to him. He did provide advice to government groups on policy [1,2]. Furthermore, the high publicity around his story about being non-verbal until he was 11 probably gave a lot of false hope to people with non-verbal children. [1] https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/2482/html/ [2] https://faculty.educ.cam.ac.uk/230223-jason-arday

▲

FiddlyPack a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Dan Ariely was one of the biggest disappointments and betrayals of my intellectual life. I found the "research" he did to be mind-blowing, groundbreaking stuff at the time, and I told many people his work, sharing his papers and podcasts as a true enthusiast.

I am astonished that he holds an academic-adjacent position anywhere, no matter what his regrets might be today. Private redemption shouldn't be out of reach, but it shouldn't be possible for him to hold a position at any institution concerned with uncovering Truth. He should have resigned out of respect, if his institution was too gutless to do so. It's a tragedy.