Answer & Explanation

Personally, I believe that Wakefield’s choice to publish fabricated evidence was likely influenced by a number of different circumstances. In addition to the obvious financial incentive from the lawyer, these also include the psychological benefits of having his colleagues involved (which impress a mindset that one is less wrong because others are doing it too), the respect and adulation from peers after publishing such “groundbreaking” information, the ego boost that comes from that, and potential grants and salary increases that come from being a highly revered scientist and researcher.

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *