7. CONCLUSION
To close these remarks, I come back to the opening quotation by Richard Feynman. In essence my central thesis is simply this: as scientists we should all strive to live up to the standards of professional conduct so memorably articulated by Feynman. Sophisticated (or merely sophistic) rationalizations of anything short of this standard serve no constructive purpose and should be avoided. In a time when public esteem for science has been damaged by high-profile cases of scientific misconduct, we in the simulation community have a unique opportunity to lead the way in achieving Feynman's ideals not only in the design and execution of our experimental procedures but also in our collective response to the challenges of responsible, professional peer review. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Although they may not have found these remarks to be completely congenial, I thank David Goodstein and James Woodward for their comments on this article. I also thank the following individuals for insightful suggestions concerning this article: R. H. Bernhard, L. F. Dickey, S. E. Elmaghraby, and S. D. Roberts (North Carolina State Univ.); F. B. Armstrong and B. J. Hurley (ABB Power T&D Co.); C. Badgett (U.S. Navy Joint Warfare Analysis Center); K. W. Bauer (Air Force Institute of Technology); R. C. H. Cheng (Univ. of Kent at Canterbury); M. M. Dessouky (Univ. of Southern California); P. L'Ecuyer (Univ. de Montréal); D. Goldsman (Georgia Institute of Technology); P. Heidelberger (IBM T. J. Watson Research Center); M. Irizarry (Univ. of Puerto Rico); R. W. Klein (Regenstrief Institute for Health Care); R. E. Nance (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ.); B. L. Nelson (Northwestern Univ.); A. A. B. Pritsker (Pritsker Corp. and Purdue Univ.); R. G. Sargent (Syracuse Univ.); B. W. Schmeiser (Purdue Univ.); T. J. Schriber (Univ. of Michigan); R. W. Seifert (Stanford Univ.); A. F. Seila (Univ. of Georgia); P. M. Stanfield (ABCO Automation, Inc. and North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State Univ.); J. J. Swain (Univ. of Alabama-Huntsville); and M. A. F. Wagner (Boeing Information Services). The quotation by Richard Feynman appearing at the beginning of this article is reproduced with permission from W. W. Norton & Company. REFERENCES * Bacon, Francis. [1620] 1994. The novum organum; with other parts of "The great instauration." Chicago: Open Court. * Broad, William, and Nicholas Wade. 1982. Betrayers of the truth. New York: Simon and Schuster. * Elliott, Deni, and Judy E. Stern, eds. 1997. Research ethics: A reader. Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, for the Institute for the Study of Applied and Professional Ethics at Dartmouth College. * Feynman, Richard P. 1985. "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman!": Adventures of a curious character. New York: W. W. Norton & Co. * Fleischmann, Martin, and Stanley Pons. 1989a. Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 261 (2A): 301-308. * Fleischmann, Martin, and Stanley Pons. 1989b. Errata. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 263: 187-188. * Forscher, Bernard K. 1965. Rules for referees. Science 150:319-321. * Gardner, Martin. 1957. Fads and fallacies in the name of science. New York: Dover Publications. * Gleser, Leon J. 1986. Some notes on refereeing. The American Statistician 40 (4): 310-312. * Honor in science. 1986. 2d ed. New Haven, Connecticut: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society. * Huizenga, John R. 1993. Cold fusion: The scientific fiasco of the century. New York: Oxford University Press. * Knepell, Peter L., and Deborah C. Arangno. 1993. Simulation validation: A confidence assessment methodology. Los Alamitos, California: IEEE Computer Society Press. * Langmuir, Irving, and Robert N. Hall. 1989. Pathological science. Physics Today 42 (10): 36-48. * Macrina, Francis L. 1995. Scientific integrity: An introductory text with cases. Washington, D.C.: ASM Press. * Medawar, Peter B. 1979. Advice to a young scientist. New York: BasicBooks. * Medawar, Peter B. 1982. Pluto's republic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. * Medawar, Peter B. 1991. Is the scientific paper a fraud? In The threat and the glory: Reflections on science and scientists, ed. David Pyke, 228-233. Oxford: Oxford University Press. * Nye, Mary Jo. 1980. N-rays: An episode in the history and psychology of science. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 11 (1): 127-156. * On being a scientist: Responsible conduct in research. 1995. 2d ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. * Popper, Karl R. 1972. The logic of scientific discovery. 3d ed. London: Hutchinson. * Sargent, Robert G. 1996. Verifying and validating simulation models. In Proceedings of the 1996 Winter Simulation Conference, ed. J. M. Charnes, D. J. Morrice, D. T. Brunner, and J. J. Swain, 55-64. Piscataway, New Jersey: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. * Waser, Nickolas M., Mary V. Price, and Richard K. Grosberg. 1992. Writing an effective manuscript review. BioScience 42 (8): 621-623. * Wood, Robert W. 1904. The n-rays. Nature 70 (1822): 530-531. * Woodward, James, and David Goodstein. 1996. Conduct, misconduct and the structure of science. American Scientist 84 (5): 479-490. AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY JAMES R. WILSON is Professor and Director of Graduate Programs in the Department of Industrial Engineering at North Carolina State University. He was Proceedings Editor for WSC '86, Associate Program Chair for WSC '91, and Program Chair for WSC '92. Currently he serves as a corepresentative of the INFORMS College on Simulation to the WSC Board of Directors. He is a member of ASA, ACM, IIE, and INFORMS.
