Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Publish or Be Ethical? Publishing Pressure and Scientific Misconduct in Research.Mariola Paruzel-Czachura, Lidia Baran & Zbigniew Spendel - forthcoming - Research Ethics:174701612098056.
    The paper reports two studies exploring the relationship between scholars’ self-reported publication pressure and their self-reported scientific misconduct in research. In Study 1 the participants were scholars representing various disciplines from one big university in Poland. In Study 2 the participants were exclusively members of the management, such as dean, director, etc. from the same university. In Study 1 the most common reported form of scientific misconduct was honorary authorship. The majority of researchers reported that they had not violated ethical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Aberration of the Citation.Khaled Moustafa - 2016 - Accountability in Research 23 (4):230.
    Multiple inherent biases related to different citation practices (for e.g., self-citations, negative citations, wrong citations, multi-authorship-biased citations, honorary citations, circumstantial citations, discriminatory citations, selective and arbitrary citations, etc.) make citation-based bibliometrics strongly flawed and defective measures. A paper can be highly cited for a while (for e.g., under circumstantial or transitional knowledge), but years later it may appear that its findings, paradigms, or theories were untrue or invalid anymore. By contrast, a paper may remain shelved or overlooked for years or (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Retractions in the Engineering Field: A Study on the Web of Science Database.Priscila Rubbo, Caroline Lievore Helmann, Celso Bilynkievycz dos Santos & Luiz Alberto Pilatti - 2019 - Ethics and Behavior 29 (2):141-155.
    This study assesses the retractions of scientific articles in engineering journals indexed on the Web of Science from 1945 to 2015. The data set was built based on documents containing the keywords retracted, retraction, withdrawal, or redress. We used database exploration techniques, including Structured Query Language and analysis of variance, for data analysis. We analyzed 238 retractions published by 117 journals. The most common reason for retraction was unethical research, and higher impact factors journals tended to publish more retractions. In (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Modelling Science Trustworthiness Under Publish or Perish Pressure.David Robert Grimes, Chris T. Bauch & John P. A. Ioannidis - 2018 - Royal Society Open Science 5 (1).
    Scientific publication is immensely important to the scientific endeavour. There is, however, concern that rewarding scientists chiefly on publication creates a perverse incentive, allowing careless and fraudulent conduct to thrive, compounded by the predisposition of top-tier journals towards novel, positive findings rather than investigations confirming null hypothesis. This potentially compounds a reproducibility crisis in several fields, and risks undermining science and public trust in scientific findings. To date, there has been comparatively little modelling on factors that influence science trustworthiness, despite (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Normalized Paper Credit Assignment: A Solution for the Ethical Dilemma Induced by Multiple Important Authors.Hui Fang - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (5):1589-1601.
    With the growth of research collaborations, the average number of authors per article and the phenomenon of equally important authorships have increased. The essence of the phenomenon of equally important authorships is the approximately equal importance of authors, both because of the difficulties in comparing authors’ contributions to a paper and some actual research evaluation practices, which give full paper credit only to the most important authors. A mechanism for indicating that various authors contributed equally is required to maintain and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Multiple First Authors as Equal Contributors: Is It Ethical?Govindasamy Agoramoorthy - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (2):625-627.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations