Harvard researcher Marc Hauser committed research misconduct in his studies of primate behavior, the university said Friday.

Earlier this month, the Boston Globe reported that Hauser, 50, the author of Moral minds: How nature designed a universal sense of right and wrong, a noted researcher in the roots of animal cognition, had been placed on leave following accusations by his students that he had purposely fabricated data in his research. His work relied on observing responses by tamarin monkeys to stimuli such as changes in sound patterns, claiming they possessed thinking skills often viewed as unique to humans and apes.

In a letter sent to Harvard faculty today, dean Michael Smith confirms a university investigation found "eight instances of scientific misconduct" by Hauser. A research paper has been retracted as a result of the finding, another corrected, and a Science paper has a correction under discussion; "five other cases" were also investigated, according to the letter.

In response to a request for comment, Hauser sent the following Friday evening:

I am deeply sorry for the problems this case has caused to my students, my colleagues, and my university.. I acknowledge that I made some significant mistakes and I am deeply disappointed that this has led to a retraction and two corrections. I also feel terrible about the concerns regarding the other five cases, which involved either unpublished work or studies in which the record was corrected before submission for publication.

I hope that the scientific community will now wait for the federal investigative agencies to make their final conclusions based on the material that they have available. I have learned a great deal from this process and have made many changes in my own approach to research and in my lab's research practices. Research and teaching are my passion. After taking some time off, I look forward to getting back to my work, mindful of what I have learned in this case. This has been painful for me and those who have been associated with the work.

Hauser's work looked for the evolutionary roots of moral behavior in the responses of cotton-top tamarins to teasing by researchers. His next planned book is Evilicious: explaining our evolved taste for being bad, according to his website.

"It is good that Harvard now confirms the rumors, so that there is no doubt that they found actual scientific misconduct, and that they will take appropriate action," says Emory University primate researcher Frans de Waal. "But it leaves open whether we in the field of animal behavior should just worry about those three articles or about many more, and then there are also publications related to language and morality that include data that are now in question. From my reading of the dean's letter, it seems that all data produced by this lab over the years are potentially in question."

Because federal funding supported Hauser's lab, the investigation was turned over to research agency officials as well as the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts, Smith says, as the university considers its own sanctions in the case. "The response of the accused to this report and the report itself are considered by the dean, who then decides whether to accept the findings, and in the case of a finding of misconduct, determine the sanctions that are appropriate," he says.

Says de Waal, by email: "Another more sensitive issue is, how many people knew about the misconduct, or how many could have known about or suspected it? Advisors, students, postdocs, close colleagues? Was the scientist solely responsible, as the dean claims, or is there more to worry about? For the moment the fairest assumption is that no one else is to blame, and certainly the students who exposed the misconduct deserve praise."

"Dishonesty in cognitive science is somehow more disturbing than dishonesty in biology or physical science," said psychologist David Premack, an emeritus professor of the University of Pennsylvania, in an email to USA TODAY. "The latter threatens the lives of people, producing a kind of harm we readily comprehend. The former puzzles us: it produces no physical harm, but threatens our standards, a kind of harm we do not readily understand. Because he caused no physical harm, we see him as discrediting everything he touched, including science itself. Hauser, a gifted writer, had no need for shortcuts."

UPDATE (4/25/2011) Science magazine has published a redone version of one of Hauser's studies, confirming the earlier results.

UPDATE (7/20/2011) The Boston Globe reports that Hauser will resign from Harvard, effective 8/1/2011. A federal Office of Research Integrity Investigation is expected to continue into his research.

Here is the text of the Harvard letter: