David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Whistleblowing in relation to scientific research misconduct, despite the benefits of increased transparency and accountability it often has brought to society and the discipline of science itself, remains generally regarded as a pariah activity by many of the most influential relevant organizations. The motivations of whistleblowers and those supporting them continued to be questioned and their actions criticised by colleagues and management, despite statutory protections for reasonable disclosures appropriately made in good faith and for the public interest. One reason for this paradoxical position, explored here, is that whistle blowing concerning scientific misconduct lacks the policy support customarily derived from firm bioethical and jurisprudential foundations. Recommendations are made for altering this situation in the public interest.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
James S. Lubalin & Jennifer L. Matheson (1999). The Fallout: What Happens to Whistleblowers and Those Accused but Exonerated of Scientific Misconduct? Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):229-250.
Benjamin K. Sovacool (2005). Using Criminalization and Due Process to Reduce Scientific Misconduct. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (5):W1-W7.
C. K. Gunsalus (1998). How to Blow the Whistle and Still Have a Career Afterwards. Science and Engineering Ethics 4 (1):51-64.
Barbara Mishkin (1999). Scientific Misconduct: Present Problems and Future Trends. Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):283-292.
Eleanor G. Shore (1995). Effectiveness of Research Guidelines in Prevention of Scientific Misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 1 (4):383-387.
James J. Dooley & Helen M. Kerch (2000). Evolving Research Misconduct Policies and Their Significance for Physical Scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):109-121.
Samuel Tilden (2010). Incarceration, Restitution, and Lifetime Debarment: Legal Consequences of Scientific Misconduct in the Eric Poehlman Case. Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (4):737-741.
Stefanic Stegemann-Bochl (2000). Misconduct in Science and the German Law. Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):57-62.
Benjamin K. Sovacool (2008). Exploring Scientific Misconduct: Isolated Individuals, Impure Institutions, or an Inevitable Idiom of Modern Science? [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (4):271-282.
Robert L. Sprague (1998). The Voice of Experience. Science and Engineering Ethics 4 (1):33-44.
Added to index2009-05-19
Total downloads17 ( #147,710 of 1,699,801 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #362,609 of 1,699,801 )
How can I increase my downloads?