The enclosed was posted to the CMU community this afternoon. While some comments about the published work have been favorable, citing the novelty of the research and the value of the information provided through the study, substantial criticism has focused on the study's scholarship and the methods by which data were acquired and used. Peer review of articles prior to publication would address many, if not all, issues pertaining to scholarship and research methodology.
Academic freedom is manifested in that way.
While the university is responsible for creating and maintaining a supportive environment for scholarly pursuit, in fact faculty and students themselves enjoy the credit and bear the responsibility for their own work. That some research conducted by Carnegie Mellon students or faculty might turn out to be controversial does not alter this distribution of responsibility. The administration and various governing bodies within any university do, of course, bear responsibility for creating appropriate policies and guidelines to which researchers can refer prior to commencing research, and for enforcing policies that pertain to alleged misconduct in research. When, on July 14, I stated that Carnegie Mellon University is responsible for the integrity of research conducted at the University, I was referring to the specific responsibility of creating and enforcing such policies. At that time I also announced that, in accordance with established University policy, a three-member faculty committee, i.e., a Committee of Inquiry, would be formed to evaluate allegations of misconduct directed at the subject research.